Mike,
Sorry for the delayed response.
Your point is very much a valid one, Mike. But since we used
*re.match*, "perf" would not match "superfun". But your point really
holds good when "super" would match "superfun" repo. Actually I was not
aware of the -s option(thank you for that) while I coded this. I wanted
the regex part only to match the like-repo names in the config. But now,
this serves my purpose. I don't see any specific requirement from anyone
for this regex part. I would like to do the further enhancements if it
really is required... Thanks for the suggestions Mike :)
Prabhu GS
On Fri, 2010-09-24 at 11:23 -0400, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> On 09/22/2010 09:07 AM, prabhugnanasundar wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > The svnperms.py script reads the svnperms.conf file, which needs the
> > section rules for all the repos uniquely. This was quite tough when we
> > have n number if repos. I wished that svnperms.py reads regex matches
> > and applies the configuration rules and came up with this patch.
> > Mid-way of my coding work, I came to know that -s switch would let us
> > specify the section name explicitly, but not the regex thing.
> > I modified the code to search for a matching section via regex, which
> > might be really helpfull for certain cases.
> > I have attached the log file and the patch file with this mail for
> > review.
>
> I'm not familiar with this script, but won't your change break compatibility
> with existing users of the script? Imagine that someone is using the script
> today with 'svnperms.py -s perf', but their configuration file also has a
> section called "[superfun]" (something that "perf" would match, albeit
> incompletely. Will the new script, invoked the old way, read the wrong
> configury?
>
> Perhaps you should tie this change of interpretation to a new command-line
> flag, perhaps a capitalized "s" (-S).
>
Received on 2010-10-01 11:44:02 CEST