Subversion, and moving mousepad in?

[Jasper Huijsmans]

Brian J. Tarricone wrote:
> 
> 
> Auke Kok wrote:
> 
>> Jasper Huijsmans wrote:
>>
>>> Brian J. Tarricone wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>> * Flexible permissions.  We want to give translators access to 
>>>> (ideally) just their own .po files.  In the common case, this will 
>>>> mean restricting each translator to one file per module.
>>>
>>>
>> very hard, but possible (with https) also very horrible to setup, 
>> although we can make the https daemon for a group of https users work 
>> side-by-side with the developers over ssh as normal. The devs get full 
>> access, the .po translator only to his file
> 
> 
> Ok, so that's only possible with https.  Am I correct in assuming that 
> the only way we're going to be able to give translators/non-devs (i.e., 
> people without real accounts on espresso) commit access is via https?
> 
>>>> * Xfce devs should have commit access to all of the Xfce core 
>>>> component modules, but not other projects (xfmedia, mousepad, 
>>>> non-core panel plugins).  It would be nice if non-core maintainers 
>>>> could easily give commit access to others (that is, other people who 
>>>> already have commit access to other parts of the repo), but this 
>>>> isn't a necessity.
>>>
>>>
>> granting access is a matter of requesting it from me. there's no 
>> automated way of doing this. The webform for new devs however makes it 
>> about 2 minutes of work for me for a new developer.
> 
> 
> For full shell access, of course.  But assuming we eventually implement 
> something else on top of svn (https/webdav?), would it be possible for 
> individual developers to be designated as "owning" a module such that 
> they can give commit access to others?  Say, like, someone started 
> sending me a string of crazy-awesome patches for xfmedia and I 
> eventually decided to give him/her commit access.  Would I be able to do 
> that - and only that - on my own?  I'm getting at the case where it 
> would be useful to add people who maybe shouldn't get a full account on 
> espresso.  Also consider the case if I wanted to give, e.g., Jasper 
> xfmedia commit access (who already has access to another part of the repo).
> 
>>>> * Ability to group components.  It would be useful to be able to 
>>>> designate certain modules (e.g., libxfcegui4, xfwm4, xfce4-panel, 
>>>> etc.) as "core Xfce components", and be able to check out/update 
>>>> based on that.  Basically I want an equivalent to "cvs co xfce4" 
>>>> which grabs the core without getting, e.g. xfmedia.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> basic unix gid's cover this the way we handle this now. works fine I 
>> think
> 
> 
> Not sure what you mean here.  How does setting group ownership on the 
> files create a logical grouping of modules that I can see without having 
> access to the svn repo's filesystem?  Right now, we have instructions on 
> the website to tell users how to check out Xfce CVS.  It's a one-liner.  
> I don't want that to become:
> 
> $ svn [whatever] libxfce4util
> $ svn [whatever] libxfcegui4
> ... etc.
> 
> And posting a for loop to get them all sounds silly to me.
> 
>>>>
>>>> * Ability to branch/tag some modules without touching the others.  
>>>> Related to this, the ability to tag/branch a series of modules 
>>>> (e.g., Xfce core) without having to issue a dozen commands and do 
>>>> each one individually.
>>>
>>>
>> err... for module in a b c ?
> 
> 
> Sure.  If you want to have to constantly remember which modules are in 
> Xfce.  Which I don't.
> 
>>>> * CVS-like operation.  If we can't do everything with svn that we 
>>>> already do with CVS, what's the point?
>>>
>>>
>> the move trick is one reason. https access is another, but I really 
>> like to begin without it. In the future we can extend access with the 
>> https methods for more flexibility (like adding a whole new auth layer 
>> for devs that do not have a ssh account).
>>
>> trust me... you want that ;^)
> 
> 
> Right.  But frankly, the main benefit I see to svn at this point *is* 
> the https access and the ability to do fine-grained permissions for 
> translators and whatnot.  CVS is far from the best solution in the 
> world, but I don't think we've had too many problems with it such that 
> moving away from it is actually necessary - it would just make a few 
> more things possible, and maybe a few things easier.  If we're taking 
> steps backwards in other areas, I start to question the wisdom of this 
> switch.
> 
>>> I certainly don't want to impose a big administration burden on Auke.
>>
>>
>> hence my proposal to start with svn+ssh first. Later we can take baby 
>> steps into https/svn and I'll throw in webmail for free.
> 
> 
> Certainly - I don't want to impose either.  Hence my offer to donate 
> some time to help with initial setup.
> 

Benedikt, Olivier, any comments/preferences?