[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

RE: "Flaw" revisited (was: Bug? FSFS revision control)

From: Monks, Peter <peter.monks_at_vignette.com>
Date: 2005-01-27 05:59:15 CET

G'day Nasser,
Why not use OS level security mechanisms to lock down the directory in
which the repository resides? After all there's no point in
Subversion (or any software, for that matter) providing any kind of
file locking mechanism if the OS itself isn't secured properly.


Peter Monks http://www.sydneyclimbing.com/
pmonks_at_sydneyclimbing.com http://www.geocities.com/yosemite/4455/


        From: Dassi, Nasser [mailto:NDassi@141xm.com]
        Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2005 8:40pm
        To: Daniel Berlin; Tom Mornini
        Cc: Subversion List
        Subject: "Flaw" revisited (was: Bug? FSFS revision control)
        If you would, please allow me to revisit the point from another
        1. Do you care about the accuracy of a revision history?
        If yes, please read on; if no, then maybe you should read on
        2. Do you feel bothered that modifying a single number value
from a text-based file can and would result in the rewriting of the
repository's very own revision history? Not even a bit? After all, it
greatly diminishes the accuracy of said revision history which you
probably care about.
        And, alas, that is my point. Although I have never been as
personally offended (racially or otherwise) by email, I beg everybody to
take a quick breath and ask yourself if changing that single number of
that single file should result into a worthless version control solution
(more easier to attain in FSFS than BDB, especially without actually
hampering the operations of SVN).
        And one final remark on my behalf:
        ... before starting a thread like this in an adversarial tone.
        Please correct if I am wrong, but usually a question mark ("?")
represents doubt, uncertainty, and a call-for-suggestions and optimism
for clarification. And not, as has occurred, an invitation for
adversarial remarks, slander, criticism of intellect, blatant
disrespect, disregard for courtesy, as well as overt ridicule of
character and various other *legally unethical* behavior.
        Eh ?! Yes. Eh.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Jan 27 06:01:26 2005

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Users mailing list.