[darcs-devel] Any answers for IsiSetup's concerns?
droundy at darcs.net
Wed Dec 12 17:44:30 UTC 2007
On Wed, Dec 12, 2007 at 09:29:06AM -0800, zooko wrote:
> On Dec 12, 2007, at 9:14 AM, David Roundy wrote:
> >>Do you think that this is analogous to two different repositories
> >>containing source code having different requirements for the source
> >I don't think so, I think that having darcs manage permissions would
> >be like having it manage file ownership. We could do that, but file
> >ownership is meaningless on most other computers. Similarly the
> >meaning of "g" and "o" are different on each computer, since the group
> >is different, and the set of users with access to the computer are
> So, concretely, suppose that there were a darcs patch type for
> changing permissions, and suppose that a patch of that type could
> express something like "make this file unreadable by people that
> aren't the owner". Actually, let's back up and ask "What kinds of
> changes to permissions do people need?". The IsiSetup folks, for
> example want to manage certain kinds of permissions on files, and
> apparently git+cogito gives them the ability to do this to their
> satisfaction. I would like to know what exactly they need to do.
> I'm not convinced that it is a priori impossible for darcs to do as
> well as git or SVN or other tools do.
On that page they also complain about git only managing the executable
bit. I agree that managing the executable bit is a good idea. But they'd
like more than git gives them, and that's where I disagree (and agree with
> I know that I personally often want darcs to stop unsetting the "x"
> bit. We could imagine a "permission settings" patch type and patches
> which say "set executable" and "set not-executable". I know you've
> already said that this would make sense. I had thought, until your
> recent message, that progress on this front, as well as on the
> symlink front, was waiting for darcs-2 patch theory to be sorted out.
Certainly, I'm not going to be adding features like this myself until
darcs-2 is out.
However, darcs shouldn't be unsetting your "x" bit. I'm pretty certain that
is a bug! :(
Department of Physics
Oregon State University
More information about the darcs-devel