Taylor Blau <me@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > * do want to respect core.sharedRepository, in which case the > current behavior of always setting split-graph permissions to '0444' > is wrong, or Yes, I would say "always 0444" is wrong. > * we do not want to respect core.sharedRepository, in which case these > patches are doing what we want by setting all commit-graph files to > have read-only permissions. > > My hunch is that we do not want to abide by core.sharedRepository here > for the same reason that, say, loose objects are read-only. What do you > think? I thought that adjusting perm for sharedRepository is orthogonal to the read-only vs read-write. If a file ought to be writable by the owner, we would make it group writable in a group shared repository. If a file is readable by the owner, we make sure it is readable by group in such a repository (and we do not want to flip write bit on). That happens by calling path.c::calc_shared_perm().
