Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2000 10:20:53 -0700 (MST) From: Nate Williams <nate@yogotech.com> To: Josef Karthauser <joe@pavilion.net> Cc: Peter Wemm <peter@netplex.com.au>, Mark Murray <markm@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/crypto/openssh login.c sshd.c Message-ID: <200003041720.KAA09488@nomad.yogotech.com> In-Reply-To: <20000304155633.J34231@florence.pavilion.net> References: <joe@pavilion.net> <20000304154049.C402D1CE0@overcee.netplex.com.au> <20000304155633.J34231@florence.pavilion.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > > Am I right in thinking that Internat and Freefall are pretty much the same? > > > If so what's to stop us from having part of the Freefall repository > > > cvsup'd from Internat? > > > > I have been advocating this for a few weeks now. It would save a lot of > > duplicated work. > > > > However, the src/crypto/openssl/crytpo/rsa/rsa_eay.c file has to be left > > out to satisfy the folks (mirrors mostly) who are worried about being an > > accessory to patent infringement. This (fortunately) is easy to arrange > > with the cvsup refuse file. (I know it's easy because I already cvsup the > > internat source to freefall and compare the two sets of code) > > > > NetBSD have announced that they are going to do this (or are already doing > > so). The new US crypto rules mean that it's ok for the US based folks to > > work on the internat.freebsd.org code. > > I'm working on changes to the CVSROOT perl scripts to make this easier. > I propose that we extend the 'avail' file syntax to add the names of the > hosts that it's ok to commit a particular part of the tree to. I think making such a special case so flexible is *way* too much overkill. Most (99.99%) of CVS projects are hosted on a single site, and our multiple site setup is not common. As a matter of opinion, I suspect this is the only one in existence, so trying to make CVS files to support this isn't worth the effort, because it's functionality only FreeBSD would use, and messing with the avail code (that many other CVS repositories use) would potentially make the existing code unusable to others. > This will also enable me to remove a lot of the hard coded cruft from > the perl scripts. The only hardcoded cruft is in commit_prep.pl, and it's either hard-coded in one-place there or hard-coded in avail. Either way it's hard-coded. > In addition I would also like to include the email address that > gets mailed with the commit message to this file. This I could see as a good thing, however it would be *much* more maintenance on the part of folks who use avail (instead of access) for do ACL's. The existing format is: avail|users|repository The implication being that 'users' are the people who are allowed commit access. If you add 'mailing address' as well, then do we send email to the users, or to the mailing address, or what? It's trivial to add another entry for the mailing list to the 'users' list right now, and if you want security then add an entry to 'passwd' with an '*' entry, so no-one can ever get access. As you can imagine, I have lots of ideas (and a bit of experience here, having done this sort of thing for 5+ years at commercial sites), and would rather not see FreeBSD's CVS scripts become even more FreeBSD centric, with no gain in functionality, but additional flexibility that benefits no one. Nate To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200003041720.KAA09488>