Julian,
Thanks, if you can, please give me a couple of weeks to think about it
and work on some diagrams. I also want to speak with people that use
SVN that I work with to make sure I am not coming up with ideas in a
bubble. Also if anyone has advice or opinions on this forum, feel free
to share them in the mean time. I will do my best to research what is
already requested on the forum to come up with the requirement or
desired capability.
Thanks,
Danny
On 11/3/2017 7:06 AM, Julian Foad wrote:
> 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.
>
> - Julian
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Received on 2017-11-15 13:44:52 CET