deac/gitolite
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Releases Wiki Activity

(big one!) rule sequencing changes!

Browse source 
There were 2 problems with rule sequencing.

Eli had a use case where everyone is equal, but some are more equal than
the others ;-)  He wanted a way to say "everyone can create repos under
their own names, but only some people should be able to rewind their
branches".

Something like this would be ideal (follow the rules in sequence for
u1/u2/u3/u4, and you will see that the "deny" rule kicks in to prevent
u1/u2 from being able to rewind, although they can certainly delete
their branches):

    @private-owners = u1 u2
    @experienced-private-owners = u3 u4

    repo CREATOR/.*
      C   = @private-owners @experienced-private-owners
      RWD = CREATOR
      RW  = WRITERS
      R   = READERS
      -   = @private-owners
      RW+D = CREATOR

In normal gitolite this doesn't work because the CREATOR rules (which
get translated to "u1" at runtime) end up over-writing the "deny" rule
when u1 or u2 are the creators.  This over-writing happens directly at
the "do compiled.pm" step.

With big-config, this does not happen (because @private-owners does not
get expanded to u1 and u2), but the problem remains: the order of
picking up elements of repo_plus and user_plus is such that, again, the
RW+D wins (it appears before the "-" rule).

We fix all that by

  - making CREATOR complete to more than just the creator's name (for
    "u1", it now becomes "u1 - wild", which is actually illegal to use
    for real so there's no possibility of a name clash!)
  - maintaining a rule sequence number that is used to sort the rules
    eventually applied (this also resulted in the refex+perm hash
    becoming a list)
This commit is contained in:
Sitaram Chamarty 2010-05-18 14:57:14 +05:30
parent c3d23f8734
commit 32056e0b7f
2 changed files with 12 additions and 7 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

11
src/gitolite.pm
View file

@ -75,14 +75,15 @@ sub check_ref {
# codes etc., but for now we're happy to just die. # codes etc., but for now we're happy to just die.
my ($allowed_refs, $repo, $ref, $perm) = @_; my ($allowed_refs, $repo, $ref, $perm) = @_;
for my $ar (@{$allowed_refs}) { my @allowed_refs = sort { $a->[0] <=> $b->[0] } @{$allowed_refs};
my $refex = (keys %$ar)[0]; for my $ar (@allowed_refs) {
my $refex = $ar->[1];
# refex? sure -- a regex to match a ref against :) # refex? sure -- a regex to match a ref against :)
next unless $ref =~ /^$refex/; next unless $ref =~ /^$refex/;
die "$perm $ref $ENV{GL_USER} DENIED by $refex\n" if $ar->{$refex} eq '-'; die "$perm $ref $ENV{GL_USER} DENIED by $refex\n" if $ar->[2] eq '-';
# as far as *this* ref is concerned we're ok # as far as *this* ref is concerned we're ok
return $refex if ($ar->{$refex} =~ /\Q$perm/); return $refex if ($ar->[2] =~ /\Q$perm/);
} }
die "$perm $ref $repo $ENV{GL_USER} DENIED by fallthru\n"; die "$perm $ref $repo $ENV{GL_USER} DENIED by fallthru\n";
} }
@ -275,7 +276,7 @@ sub parse_acl
$repos{$dr}{DELETE_IS_D} = 1 if $repos{$r}{DELETE_IS_D}; $repos{$dr}{DELETE_IS_D} = 1 if $repos{$r}{DELETE_IS_D};
$repos{$dr}{NAME_LIMITS} = 1 if $repos{$r}{NAME_LIMITS}; $repos{$dr}{NAME_LIMITS} = 1 if $repos{$r}{NAME_LIMITS};
for my $u ('@all', @user_plus) { for my $u ('@all', "$gl_user - wild", @user_plus) {
my $du = $gl_user; $du = '@all' if $u eq '@all'; my $du = $gl_user; $du = '@all' if $u eq '@all';
$repos{$dr}{C}{$du} = 1 if $repos{$r}{C}{$u}; $repos{$dr}{C}{$du} = 1 if $repos{$r}{C}{$u};
$repos{$dr}{R}{$du} = 1 if $repos{$r}{R}{$u}; $repos{$dr}{R}{$du} = 1 if $repos{$r}{R}{$u};

8
src/gl-compile-conf
View file

@ -95,6 +95,9 @@ our %groups = ();
# in between :) # in between :)
my %repos = (); my %repos = ();
# rule sequence number
my $rule_seq = 0;
# <sigh>... having been forced to use a list as described above, we lose some # <sigh>... having been forced to use a list as described above, we lose some
# efficiency due to the possibility of the same {ref, perms} pair showing up # efficiency due to the possibility of the same {ref, perms} pair showing up
# multiple times for the same repo+user. So... # multiple times for the same repo+user. So...
@ -286,8 +289,9 @@ sub parse_conf_file
# that do *not* use NAME limits. Setting a flag that # that do *not* use NAME limits. Setting a flag that
# can be checked right away will help us do that # can be checked right away will help us do that
$repos{$repo}{NAME_LIMITS} = 1 if $ref =~ /^NAME\//; $repos{$repo}{NAME_LIMITS} = 1 if $ref =~ /^NAME\//;
push @{ $repos{$repo}{$user} }, { $ref => $perms } my $p_user = $user; $p_user =~ s/(creator|readers|writers)$/$1 - wild/;
unless $rurp_seen{$repo}{$user}{$ref}{$perms}++; push @{ $repos{$repo}{$p_user} }, [ $rule_seq++, $ref, $perms ]
unless $rurp_seen{$repo}{$p_user}{$ref}{$perms}++;
} }
} }
} }