Just picking up on one small point here...
Daniel J. Lacks, PhD wrote:
>>> The stash would work similar to a commit
>>> except it would check-in code perhaps in a hidden or protected branch
>> Making namespaces of branches that are 'hidden' or 'protected' is
>> something that can potentially be done with server authz rules, but is
>> this important for you? Why? [...]
> [...] Configuring authz rules is not something the typical user [...]
Completely agree. What I meant was: Do you really need these stashes to
be 'hidden' or 'protected'? Why, what for? Do the authz rules provide
the semantics you need? (If so, we could build this in to the feature.)
My take on this is that "I don't want my private work to be seen by
everybody by default" and "other people shouldn't be able to write to MY
shelves area" are the sort of reactions that potential users have, that
aren't real requirements. Another is "I don't want my repository growing
bigger and bigger with temporary work; I need these to be completely
deleted". That one is totally different and has huge implications for
the design, but again I think it is a bogus "requirement" that is really
only a nice-to-have.
I can only think of these in the abstract, so far. If your real-life
experience sheds light on them, that would be very valuable input.
Received on 2017-11-03 12:06:29 CET