"repo @all" can be used to set permissions or configurations for all
already defined repos. (A repository is defined if it has permission
rules associated, empty "repo" stanza or "@group=..." line is not enough.)
For example to allow a backup user to clone all repos:
# All other configuration
[...]
repo @all
R = backup
Signed-off-by: Teemu Matilainen <teemu.matilainen@reaktor.fi>
we've removed the facility of auto-viving "W" access repos when they are
not wildcards. A wildcard pattern like foo/CREATER was
indistinguishable from a non-wildcard repo, and resolving it was
becoming kludgier and kludgier. (See the revert in the commit before
this one for details).
As a side effect of not being able to distinguish wildcard repos from
real repos easily, the expand command now works for a normal repo too
(because we have to make it work for "foo/CREATER")
This reverts commit 33fc0a7e9f.
Was causing too much trouble with access reporting (basic and expanded)
because of the extra ^ at the start...
The paranoia referred to in that commit was this sequence:
- admin creates a named (non wildcard) repo using config file push
- somehow that gets deleted (OS error, corruption, ...)
- admin just asks anyone with a current repo to push it to auto-revive
it (because we allow people with "W" access to non-wildcard repos to
auto-viv repos)
- if you're treating this the same as a wildcard creation, you end up
making this guy the "creater" of that repo, which means he can add
users etc...
We resolve that paranois by disallowing autoviv of "W" access repos at
all... Only "C" access repos can be autovived by a user (this will be
in the next commit)
".../gl-auth-command username" is the normal command that authkeys
forces, and this prevents that key from being used to get a shell.
We now allow the user to get a shell if the forced command has a "-s"
before the "username", like ".../gl-auth-command -s sitaram".
(Now that a plain "ssh gitolite" gets you a shell, there's a new "info"
command that such privileged keys can use to get basic access info).
Thanks to Jesse Keating for the idea! I can't believe this never
occurred to me before, but I guess I was so enamoured of my "innovation"
in converting what used to be an error into some useful info I didn't
think a bit more :/
Looks like I'd forgotten this when I did the autoviv code. Repos
created via gl-compile (when you add a new repo to the config file and
push) worked fine, but repos created via gl-auth (when you autoviv a
repo, wild or not) did not.
This *should* be merged into wildrepos soon after testing; wildrepos
will have a lot more autoviv-ing than master.
The admin repo's post-update hook needs to know where $GL_ADMINDIR is,
and we had a weird way of doing that which depended on gl-install
actually munging the hook code.
We also always assumed the binaries are in GL_ADMINDIR/src.
We now use an env var to pass both these values. This removes the weird
dependency on gl-install that the post-update hook had, as well as make
running other programs easier due to the new $GL_BINDIR env var.
...like "git clone host:foo/", even if it matches "repo foo/.*"
NOTE: I expect a few more of these special cases to be found as time
goes on and people find new ways to abuse the regex system, whether it
is done intentionally or not. Anything not fixable by changing the
config file will be fixed in the code asap.
This one, for instance, seems fixable by using "foo/.+" instead of
"foo/.*". But it actually isn't; the user can do "git clone host:foo//"
and bypass that :(
Still I suspect most situations will get an entry in the "then don't do
that" file :)
----
patient: "doc, it hurts when I do this"
doc: "then don't do that"
Teemu's testing brought up a situtation I had not anticipated:
"repo foo/CREATER" looks like a non-regex, and its creation then (a)
goes by "W" permissions instead of "C" permissions, and (b) the
creater's name does not get recorded (no gl-creater file).
SIDE NOTE: one way is to reduce the paranoia, and just put the
creater name in anyway. Treat a repo created from gl-auth as a
wildcard-matched autovivified repo, because the *other* kind would
have actually got created by gl-compile anyway.
However, I can think of *one* very far-out situation where this
could backfire on an unwary admin, and I'm paranoid :-)
So we need to force it to look like a regex. Moving the line-anchoring
from `parse_acl` to gl-compile sounded fine, until I realised that the
"$" isn't easy. Backslashitis, bigtime, plus the single/double quote
tricks we're playing with the dumped hash adds its own complexities.
Best of both worlds, promote the "^" to gl-compile, keep the "$" where
it is...!
Git repository configurations can be set/unset by declaring "config"
lines in "repo" stanzas in gitolite.conf. For example:
repo gitolite
config hooks.mailinglist = gitolite-commits@example.tld
config hooks.emailprefix = "[gitolite] "
config foo.bar = ""
config foo.baz =
The firs two set (override) the values. Double quotes must be used to
preserve preceding spaces. Third one sets an empty value and the last
removes all keys.
Signed-off-by: Teemu Matilainen <teemu.matilainen@reaktor.fi>
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.
This feature has *no* warranty, and so no documentation. Not more than
this transcript anyway.
config file:
@prof = u1
@TAs = u2 u3
@students = u4 u5 u6
repo assignments/CREATER/a[0-9][0-9]
C = @students
RW+ = CREATER
RW = WRITERS @TAs
R = READERS @prof
session:
as user "u4":
# check your permissions
$ ssh git@server
PTY allocation request failed on channel 0
hello u4, the gitolite version here is v0.95-31-gbcb14ca
you have the following permissions:
C assignments/CREATER/a[0-9][0-9]
@ @ testing
Connection to localhost closed.
# autovivify repos for assignment 12 and 24
$ git clone git@server:assignments/u4/a12 a12
Initialized empty Git repository in /home/sitaram/t/a12/.git/
Initialized empty Git repository in /home/gitolite/repositories/assignments/u4/a12.git/
warning: You appear to have cloned an empty repository.
$ git clone git@server:assignments/u4/a24 a24
Initialized empty Git repository in /home/sitaram/t/a24/.git/
Initialized empty Git repository in /home/gitolite/repositories/assignments/u4/a24.git/
warning: You appear to have cloned an empty repository.
# check what repos you autovivified
$ ssh git@server expand assignments/u4/a[0-9][0-9]
(u4) assignments/u4/a12
(u4) assignments/u4/a24
as user "u5":
# check your basic permissions
$ ssh git@server
PTY allocation request failed on channel 0
hello u5, the gitolite version here is v0.95-31-gbcb14ca
you have the following permissions:
C assignments/CREATER/a[0-9][0-9]
@ @ testing
Connection to localhost closed.
# see if you have access to any of u4's repos
$ ssh git@server expand assignments/u4/a[0-9][0-9]
# (no output produced)
as user "u4":
# allow "u5" read access to assignment 12
# note you type in "R u5", hit enter, then hit Ctrl-D. Gitolite
# then produces a confirmation message starting "New perms are:"
$ ssh git@server setperms assignments/u4/a12
R u5
New perms are:
R u5
as user "u5":
# again see if you have access to any u4 repos
$ ssh git@server expand assignments/u4/a[0-9][0-9]
(u4) assignments/u4/a12
as user "u4":
# check what permissions you gave to assignment 12
$ ssh git@server getperms assignments/u4/a12
R u5
# add RW access to "u6" to assignment 12
# again, type 'em in, then hit Ctrl-D; and note each time you run
# this you're starting from scratch -- you can't "add to" the
# permissions. Deal with it...
$ ssh git@server setperms assignments/u4/a12
R u5
RW u6
New perms are:
R u5
RW u6
as user "u6":
# check what u4 stuff you have access to
$ ssh git@server expand assignments/u4/a[0-9][0-9]
(u4) assignments/u4/a12
- new_repo now takes a "creater" parameter; if given, this user is
recorded (in a file called "gl-creater") as the creater of the repo.
Only applicable to wildcards
- repo_rights reads "gl-creater" and "gl-perms" to tell you who
created it, and whether you (the $user) are in the list of READERS
or WRITERS
**NOTE** that the mechanism to create/update gl-perms has not been
written yet... (as of this commit)
- parse_acl takes 4 more arguments, all optional. The repo name we're
interested in (set by all except the access reporting function), and
the names to be interpolated as $creater, $readers, writers
- report_basic now knows about the "C" permission and shows it
- auth now autovivifies a repo if the user has "C" and it's a wildcard
match, or (the old case) the user has "W" and it's not a wildcard.
In the former case, the creater is also set
IMPLEMENTATION NOTES:
- the Dumper code now uses a custom hash key sort to make sure
$creater etc land up at the *end*
- a wee bit of duplication exists in the update hook; it borrows a
little code from parse_acl. I dont (yet) want to include all of
gitolite.pm for that little piece...
There's a new "C" permission to let someone *create* a repo that matches
the pattern given in the "repo ..." line. If the word CREATER appears
in the repo pattern, then that is forced to the actual user performing
that operation.
Something like this (we'll discuss READERS and WRITERS later):
repo personal/CREATER/.+
C = @staff
R [foo] = READERS
RW [bar] = WRITERS
...various other permissions as usual...
Delegation checking also changes quite a bit... see comments in code
Implementation: there's also a sneaky little trick we're playing here
with the dumped hash
@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 :)
all of this is prep for the upcoming, all-new, chrome-plated,
"wildrepos" branch :)
- many variables go to gitolite.pm now, and are "our"d into the other
files as needed
- new functions parse_acl, report_basic to replace inlined code
consider:
repo = "some desc" # some comment
(and note that the regex for recognising a description expects that
dblquote to be the *last* character on the line)
part of comment on b78a720cee:
The only reason it's getting into master is because it looks cool!
I hate it when something that looks cool doesn't work right :(
creating a repo on gitolite-admin push is *needed* in order to get
descriptions and export-ok files to work right
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.
the "create a new repo" code moves from compile to auth.
Only someone who has W access can create it, but he can do so even on a
"R" operation (like clone or ls-remote).
This is a pre-requisite for rebel's wildcard repos, where
autovivification is the only way you can create arbitrary repos matching
a pattern.
The only reason it's getting into master is because it looks cool!
----
OK that's a lie; the real reason is to keep the two branches as similar
as possible, though they;ve diverged quite a bit since the "only
one-line difference" days where "rebel" just meant "deny/exclude"
rules!)
