On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 3:10 AM, Alan Barrett wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Feb 2010, dcz wrote:
>> Here is what I'm trying to do : some user (let's call them junior
>> developer) should require their commit to be authorized by other
>> (senior developer) before they would actually be committed.
>
> You cou
On Wed, 17 Feb 2010, dcz wrote:
> Here is what I'm trying to do : some user (let's call them junior
> developer) should require their commit to be authorized by other
> (senior developer) before they would actually be committed.
You could require the junior developer to put a line like this
in the
ruary 2010 7:43 PM
To: users@subversion.apache.org
Subject: Re: Junior developers
Hello,
Yes, could be a solution, use branches, but I would like to avoid the one
branch per JD situation also. I'm currently investigating over review board if
you have thoughts to share.
FYI the trunk is indee
...@phpbb-seo.com]
Sent: Thursday, 18 February 2010 7:43 PM
To: users@subversion.apache.org
Subject: Re: Junior developers
Hello,
Yes, could be a solution, use branches, but I would like to avoid the one
branch per JD situation also. I'm currently investigating over review board if
you
Hello,
Yes, could be a solution, use branches, but I would like to avoid the
one branch per JD situation also. I'm currently investigating over
review board if you have thoughts to share.
FYI the trunk is indeed intended a stable stream.
Le 17/02/2010 23:37, Srilakshmanan, Lakshman a écrit :
Le 17/02/2010 18:34, Ryan Schmidt a écrit :
On Feb 17, 2010, at 08:36, dcz wrote:
Le 17/02/2010 15:24, Andy Levy a écrit :
There is no "dry run" for a commit. It's conceivable that you could
check the user ID in the pre-commit, and if the committer is JD,
reject the com
Hi dcz,
You can write a pre-commit hook or use AuthzSVNAccessFile to restrict
commit into trunk by only Senior Developers. This way the Junior
developer can perform his work in the branch and requests the Senior
Developer to review and merge his code back into trunk in preparation
for release. I a
On Feb 17, 2010, at 08:36, dcz wrote:
> Le 17/02/2010 15:24, Andy Levy a écrit :
>>
>
>> There is no "dry run" for a commit. It's conceivable that you could
>> check the user ID in the pre-commit, and if the committer is JD,
>> reject the commit while mailing a diff to SD which represents the
>
Le 17/02/2010 15:24, Andy Levy a écrit :
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 09:19, dcz wrote:
Thanks for responding.
I was hopping that someone did put something together to handle this.
It looks like doable with a pre-commit hook that would have a look in a db
(or a file) to find out if the user is
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 09:19, dcz wrote:
> Thanks for responding.
>
> I was hopping that someone did put something together to handle this.
> It looks like doable with a pre-commit hook that would have a look in a db
> (or a file) to find out if the user is JD or SD. For JDs, the commit could
> b
Thanks for responding.
I was hopping that someone did put something together to handle this.
It looks like doable with a pre-commit hook that would have a look in a
db (or a file) to find out if the user is JD or SD. For JDs, the commit
could be made dry-run, and the script could in such case s
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 08:17, dcz wrote:
> Hello,
> Here is what I'm trying to do : some user (let's call them junior developer)
> should require their commit to be authorized by other (senior developer)
> before they would actually be committed.
>
> Since I saw this feature on an svn (though I d
12 matches
Mail list logo
