obliterate functionality?

cowwoc cowwoc at bbs.darktech.org
Thu Mar 20 08:01:57 CDT 2008

Masklinn wrote:
> On 20 Mar 2008, at 02:54 , cowwoc wrote:
>> Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
>>> Have you seen Linus' talk on Distributed Version Control Systems?  
>>> While he
>>> is
>>> not always nice about it, he has some interesting things to say on  
>>> why it
>>> is
>>> good if all repository mirrors are created equal.
>> Let's be clear here: repository mirrors are repository clients are two
>> different things. For one thing, mirrors to be equal to one another in
>> permission whereas clients tend to have less control. One would expect
>> mirrors with read/write access to fall under the guise of the same  
>> trusted
>> organization, or else how do you prevent someone from checking in  
>> random
>> junk into the FreeBSD repository using one of the mirrors? Point  
>> being, if
>> all mirrors are equal, then they should respect each other's  
>> obliterate
>> commands.
>> -- 
> There are no "repository clients" in Mercurial. Or in Git, or in  
> Bazaar-NG, or in Darcs, for that matter. Any clone of an existing  
> repository is a mirror, and as all mirrors are equal, all clones of an  
> initial "root" repository are equal to one another and to the "root".

That's fine. So Sun's mirrors would recognize one another and give each
other permission to obliterate, whereas if obliterate came from an
unknown/untrusted repository (my concept of a client) it would reject the
operation based on insufficient permissions. Would that work?

View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/obliterate-functionality--tp16114445p16177819.html
Sent from the Mercurial mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

More information about the Mercurial mailing list