"James CE Johnson" <jcej_at_tragus.org> wrote on 04/18/2008 09:21:33 AM:
> Hey Adam,
> This got a bit wordy as I was writing it up so I dumped it on my
> neglected blog:
> Let me know if you have trouble getting to it (corporate firewalls and
> that). If so, I will go ahead and post it all here.
Nice write-up. I swear I tried something similar in the past and I
was able to "get around" my sub directory apache permissions by
just doing a checkout at a higher level. I'll have to retest.
(I didn't think the client used full sub paths when doing a
recursive checkout, so the potentially more restrictive apache
location checks never get called in this case.)
Any reason you chose to use the longer list of "write" options
in the limit/limitexcept pair instead of swapping them like this:
# These groups have write access
<LimitExcept GET PROPFIND OPTIONS REPORT>
Require group CN=groupa-rw,...
# These groups have read access
<Limit GET PROPFIND OPTIONS REPORT>
Require group CN=groupa-rw,...
Require group CN=groupb-ro,...
> > Thank you very much james. I look forward to your solution. I've found
> > a little bit of a solution from Mandriva where they modify the
> > svn_perms.py file, however as I'm not 100% familiar with the
> > additional python tools I'm not 100% sure on how to implement this
> > myself in an ubuntu environment.
> > The other issue that I have with it is, as this is an enterprise
> > environment, that sort of customization would prefer to be avoided,
> > however I understand that in this particular situation such may be
> > required, and I am not avoiding it 100%.
> > Thanks for your future reply :)
> > OffbeatAdam
> > ---
> > "I'm not going to die. I'm going to find out if I'm really alive." -
> > Spike Spiegel, Cowboy Bebop.
> > "Do not attribute to malice that which can be easily explained with
> > stupidity." - Hanlon's Razor
> > On Apr 17, 2008, at 3:55 PM, James CE Johnson wrote:
> >> Hi Adam,
> >> I'm doing exactly this here in my corner of the world.
> >> Unfortunately, I'm
> >> running out the door at the moment. I will try to post something of
> >> the
> >> details for you tomorrow.
> >> James
> >>> Hey Everyone,
> >>> I have successfully had svn, apache, and webdav utilize LDAP for
> >>> authentication...
> >>> My issue, is that I would like to have the ACL depend on LDAP as
> >>> well.
> >>> We have groups defined in the directory that would not only make the
> >>> ACL easy to administer, but also make it cleaner and more legible.
> >>> We have upwards of about 50 to 60 users spread across a number of
> >>> groups, which makes the ACL rather large and dissociative.
> >>> Is there any way to have it depend on LDAP groups for access
> >>> controls?
> >>> I have searched and seen a few threads in the mailing list related
> >>> this, but they are all ~1yr or older, and was hoping to see if there
> >>> were any creative solutions to this.
> >>> OffbeatAdam
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
Received on 2008-04-18 17:19:42 CEST