On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 4:54 PM, Andy Levy wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 16:47, alexus wrote:
>> ok, path based authentication how would I accomplish that?
>>
>> I'm using apache for svn, I'm not using svnserve
>>
>
> 90% of the time, the manual has the answers. This is one of those
> times.
>
On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 16:47, alexus wrote:
> ok, path based authentication how would I accomplish that?
>
> I'm using apache for svn, I'm not using svnserve
>
90% of the time, the manual has the answers. This is one of those
times.
http://svnbook.red-bean.com/nightly/en/svn.serverconfig.pathbas
ok, path based authentication how would I accomplish that?
I'm using apache for svn, I'm not using svnserve
On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 4:17 PM, Bob Archer wrote:
> >> is there a way to restrict users to commit only to a /branches vs
> >> /trunk?
>
> > Two ways..
> >
> > 1. Path based authenticati
>> is there a way to restrict users to commit only to a /branches vs
>> /trunk?
> Two ways..
>
> 1. Path based authentication... don't give them write access.
of course I meant path based authorization here. I would like to the book here,
but it doesn't seem to be coming up.
>
> 2. Pre-commit
Two ways..
1. Path based authentication... don't give them write access.
2. Pre-commit hook... have the hook not allow commits to /trunk (or course you
will need a way around the hook.)
BOb
From: alexus [mailto:ale...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2011 3:06 PM
To: users@subversion.apach
On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 1:29 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 2:19 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
>
>> Of course you _can_ secure it. My point is that permitting ssh and
>> restricting access to ssh by itself is very likely to make your system less
>> secure (if you count on firewal
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 2:19 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
> Of course you _can_ secure it. My point is that permitting ssh and
> restricting access to ssh by itself is very likely to make your system less
> secure (if you count on firewall protections) instead of more so. And
> nothing that can be don
On 1/5/2011 1:04 PM, David Brodbeck wrote:
It's possible to do secure Subversion. Use svn+ssh access,
disable or
block other services at the firewall,
If ssh is permitted and you didn't personally set it up, what are
the odds that port tunneling or ssh's built i
On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 8:46 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
> On 1/2/2011 9:43 PM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
>
>>
>> It's possible to do secure Subversion. Use svn+ssh access, disable or
>> block other services at the firewall,
>>
>
> If ssh is permitted and you didn't personally set it up, what are the o
On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 11:46 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
> On 1/2/2011 9:43 PM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
>>
>> It's possible to do secure Subversion. Use svn+ssh access, disable or
>> block other services at the firewall,
>
> If ssh is permitted and you didn't personally set it up, what are the odds
>
On 1/2/2011 9:43 PM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
It's possible to do secure Subversion. Use svn+ssh access, disable or
block other services at the firewall,
If ssh is permitted and you didn't personally set it up, what are the
odds that port tunneling or ssh's built in socks proxy will allow acc
11 matches
Mail list logo
