Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Linus

[Colin Walters]

On Mon, 2003-10-13 at 01:27, Tom Lord wrote:

> In the case of wanting non-trivial access controls?  No, I don't think
> it's ugly at all.   I think it's elegant.   For 0 (zero (nil (nada
> (no)))) new lines of code -- the problem is solved in a
> straightforward and simple way.

Well, all I can say is that we simply disagree on this then.  I just
can't consider forcing people to use ssh+accounts/script hacks instead
of the local filesystem and its builtin access controls as in any way
elegant.  

>     > Especially given the fact that just a bit of general support in tla
>     > would allow other important transports like file:// to work?
> 
> Bullshit.

That's not a very good response.

> I must have missed the study that proved that you have identified a
> serious obstacle to anything.

How do you want me to prove my thesis?  The total lack of nontrivial
sites using multiple writers to an archive could be construed as a
fairly strong argument in my favor, for one thing.  On the other hand
you may just interpret it as arch not being popular enough yet.

You on the other hand could support your thesis and simultaneously cast
doubt on mine by say getting an affirmation from the savannah and
sourceforge teams that creating a new account per project or hacking ssh
subsystems wouldn't be a problem.

> Keep an open mind.  You might learn something.

I always do.