Having to specify "D" separately from RW or RW+ was cumbersome, and
although I don't actually use this feature, I can see the point.
One way to think of this is:
- RW and RW+ were the only existing branch level rights
- it doesnt make sense to have D rights without W (hence RW) rights
- so we simply suffix a D to these if required.
Thus you can have RW, RW+, RWD, RW+D.
I hope the (hopefully few) of you who have started to use this feature
will convert your configs when you next upgrade to "pu".
I now regret pushing the previous syntax to master too quickly -- lots
of people use master only, and on the next promotion of pu the syntax
will change. To reduce this exposure, this change will be promoted to
master very soon.
normally, RW+ means permission to rewind or delete.
Now, if you use "D" permission anywhere in a repo config, that means
"delete" and RW+ then means only "rewind", no delete.
- no need to put it at the end of the config file now, yeaaay!
- @all for @all is meaningless and not supported. People asking will
be told to get a life or use git-daemon.
- NAME/ limits for @all repos is ignored for efficiency reasons.
There are some disadvantages to the old-style personal branch scheme.
It only allows one specific pattern (of refname) to be used, forces that
pattern to be applicable to *all* repos in the entire config, and
requires editing the rc file (on the server) to be edited to achieve
this.
In other words, it's a very blunt instrument...
The new style depends on using lines like this within a specific repo
config:
RW+ personal/USER/ = @userlist
The important thing is that the "branch" name should contain `/USER/`
(including the slashes). Access is still determined by the right hand
side of course.
This gives you the following advantages:
- allow it only for repos that need it
- allow different patterns to be used for different repos
- allow *multiple* patterns; just add more than one such line
- allow the pattern to have suffixes (eg: foo/USER/bar)
The wildrepos branch has been merged into master, and deleted. It will no
longer exist as a separate branch. Instead, a new variable
called $GL_WILDREPOS has been added which acts as a switch; when
off (which is the default), many wildrepos features are disabled.
(the "C" permissions, and the getperms (etc.) commands mainly).
Important: if you are using wildrepos, please set "$GL_WILDREPOS = 1;" in
the RC file when you upgrade to this version (or just before you do the
upgrade).
lots of conflicts, esp in gl-auth-command, due to refactoring the
"special commands" stuff on master
Conflicts:
doc/3-faq-tips-etc.mkd
src/gitolite.pm
src/gl-auth-command
src/gl-compile-conf
great idea by Robin Smidsrød: since users are already capable of
authenticating themselves to gitolite via ssh keys, use that to let them
set or change their own HTTP passwords (ie, run the "htpasswd" command
with the correct parameters on behalf of the "git" user on the server)
code, rc para, and documentation. In fact everything except... ahem...
testing ;-)
and while we're about it, we also reorganised the way these helper
commands (including the venerable "info" are called)
This is actually a pretty big deal, and I am seriously starting wonder
if calling this "gito*lite*" is justified anymore.
Anyway, in for a penny, in for a pound...
This patch implements a generic way to allow access control for external
commands, as long as they are invoked via ssh and present a server-side
command that contains enough information to make an access control
decision.
The first (and only, so far) such command implemented is rsync.
Please read the changes in this commit (at least the ones in conf/ and
doc/) carefully.
It's not clear whether $projectroot has or does not have a trailing
slash. Current code assumes it does, but we need to cater for it not
having one also. Otherwise the final reponame ends up with a leading
slash, once $projectroot has been stripped from the beginning of the
full repo path.
Gitolite allows you to restrict changes by file/dir name. The syntax
for this used "PATH/" as a prefix to denote such file/dir patterns.
This has now been changed to "NAME/" because PATH is potentially
confusing.
While this is technically a backward-incompatible change, the feature
itself was hitherto undocumented, and only a few people were using it,
so I guess it's not that bad...
Also added documentation now.
we had usurped the email style syntax to separate multiple keys
belonging to the same person, like sitaram@desktop.pub and
sitaram@laptop.pub. If you have so many users that you need the full
email address to disambiguate some of them (or you want to do it for
just plain convenience), you couldn't.
This patch fixes that in a backward compatible way. See
doc/3-faq-tips-etc.mkd for details.
@all in a deny rule doesnt work as it might look in the config file,
because @all rights are checked last. This is fine if you dont have any
DENYs (and so rule order doesn't matter), but with DENY it causes some
problems.
I never bothered to document it because I did not expect that any repo
that is "serious" enough to have deny rules *at all* should then allow
*any* kind of "write* access to @all. That's a very big contradiction
in terms of paranoia!
Translation: this will not be supported. Don't bother asking. You know
who you are :)
Well, something even more outrageous than deny rules and path-based
limits came along, so I decided that "rebel" was actually quite
"conformist" in comparision ;-)
Jokes apart, the fact is that the access control rules, even when using
deny rules and path-limits, are still *auditable*. Which means it is
good enough for "corporate use".
[The stuff that I'm working on now takes away the auditability aspect --
individual users can "own" repos, create rules for themselves, etc.
So let's just say that is the basis of distinguishing "master" now.]
Summary: much as I did not want to use "excludes", I guess if we don't put the
code in "master" it's OK to at least *write* (and test) the code!
See the example config file for how to use it.
See "design choices" section in the "faq, tips, etc" document for how it
works.
I don't have a use for "@all" at all (pun not intended!) other than the
"testing" repo, but <teemu dot matilainen at iki dot fi> sent in a patch
to mark those repos with "R" and "W" in the permissions list, and I
started thinking about it.
This could actually be useful if we *differentiated* such access from
normal (explicit username) access. From the "corporate environment"
angle, it would be nice if a project manager could quickly check if any
of his projects have erroneously been made accessible by @all.
So what we do now is print "@" in the corresponding column if "@all" has
the corresponding access.
Also, when someone has access both as himself *and* via @all, we print
the "@"; printing the "R" or "W" would hide the "@", and wouldn't
correctly satisfy the use case described above.
- it appears that what we call $repo_base, gitweb already needs as
$projectroot
- allow read of repos defined as readable by @all
plus some minor declaration changes to make the sample code work as is
(thanks to teemu dot matilainen at iki dot fi)
