[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] multiple committers, again
From: |
Jan Hudec |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] multiple committers, again |
Date: |
Wed, 25 Aug 2004 09:01:53 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.6+20040803i |
On Wed, Aug 25, 2004 at 15:33:04 +1200, Martin Langhoff wrote:
> Robert,
>
> I am going through the same issues, but with the view that it is
> approachable. We have come to get used to the tradeoffs in other SCMs
> (I have accepted/endured a fair share with CVS). The mechanisms and
> tradeoffs are different with tla.
> Some notes on your alternatives...
>
> On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 15:57:32 -0500, Robert Anderson <address@hidden> wrote:
> > 0) set a umask which doesn't strip g+w in startup files
> > 1) use a shared account
>
> Those are the options I would focus on. The umask option is in fact a
> combination of a sticky group ownership plus a suitable umask. For
> "local" users, someone has posted a minimalistic shell wrapper that
> sets the umask (rather than in your startup file!).
>
> For remote users using sftp, you should be able to tell the sftp
> server to enforce the umask in the Arch repository directory.
Could you please tell us just how to do it? I can't even find any way to
set umask anywhere on the remote side (there is a command to set it on
the local side, but that won't help).
> > shared accounts are expressly forbidden
>
> Shared accounts are still a good idea for repositories with remote
> access. The account should be an 'sftp-only' account, which is
> hopefully reasonable to ask for. Set /bin/false for the shell and
> restrict it from sshd_config to only sftp. Can't do any damage like
> that ;)
In a big computer lab, it's usualy simply forbidden and noone will bother
to change anything for arch.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jan 'Bulb' Hudec
<address@hidden>
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] multiple committers, again, (continued)
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] multiple committers, again, Stig Brautaset, 2004/08/24
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] multiple committers, again, Jan Hudec, 2004/08/25
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] multiple committers, again, Martin Langhoff, 2004/08/25
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] multiple committers, again, Jan Hudec, 2004/08/25
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] multiple committers, again, Cameron Patrick, 2004/08/25
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] multiple committers, again, Jan Hudec, 2004/08/26
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] multiple committers, again, Robert Collins, 2004/08/26
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] multiple committers, again, Martin Langhoff, 2004/08/24
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] multiple committers, again,
Jan Hudec <=
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] multiple committers, again, Martin Langhoff, 2004/08/25
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] multiple committers, again, Jan Hudec, 2004/08/25
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] multiple committers, again, conrad, 2004/08/25
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] multiple committers, again, Jan Hudec, 2004/08/26
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] multiple committers, again, Matthew Palmer, 2004/08/26
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] multiple committers, again, Jan Hudec, 2004/08/26
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] multiple committers, again, Matthew Palmer, 2004/08/26
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] multiple committers, again, Jan Hudec, 2004/08/26
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] multiple committers, again, James Blackwell, 2004/08/25
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] multiple committers, again, Jan Hudec, 2004/08/26