On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 02:28:52PM +0100, Axel Thimm wrote: > > BTW, will it be possible to have different permissions for the i2c and > > lm_sensors2 repositories? I'd like to grant more people developer > > access to lm_sensors2, but write access to the i2c repository needs to > > be restricted as changes to it are supposed to be very rare now. > > Not through ssh access. In this case the developer only sees a > database there is no fine grained per file/directory access. If you > want to go that way there are two possibilities: > > o Have separate repos for lm_sensors and i2c. That would not be nice, > as it would effectively mean separate trac installs, too. > > o don't use ssh access, but http & dav > > I think if there will be ACLs then we'd need to go with http & > dav. For the users/developers this might be even nicer, as the URL is > the same as the ones for the anonymous access. > > In that case, authentication wouldn't happen anymore with ssh keys, > but via http/https methods. > > I'd recommend to make sure the repo layout is compatible with the idea > of different ACLs for i2c and lm_sensors (e.g. top level dirs are > lm_sensors/i2c and trunk/branch/tag comes beneath), and start with ssh > key authentication for now, which is already set up. We can later > switch to a different authentication schemes to allow for ACLs. I forgot to mention that the http access method has the nice sideeffect that you can share the same authentication with trac, that also uses http authentication. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 191 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.lm-sensors.org/pipermail/lm-sensors/attachments/20060219/472222ee/attachment.bin
