From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Carlos =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Mart=EDn?= Nieto Subject: Re: Does git have "Path-Based Authorization"? Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2011 02:05:02 +0200 Message-ID: <1317427503.4331.37.camel@centaur.lab.cmartin.tk> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-qGyCcIQp+8jTKEagoRv9" Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Grant X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sat Oct 01 02:05:16 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1R9n4t-0007lF-SJ for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Sat, 01 Oct 2011 02:05:16 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755982Ab1JAAFE (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Sep 2011 20:05:04 -0400 Received: from kimmy.cmartin.tk ([91.121.65.165]:45550 "EHLO kimmy.cmartin.tk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755251Ab1JAAFD (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Sep 2011 20:05:03 -0400 Received: from [192.168.1.17] (brln-4dbc5ac8.pool.mediaWays.net [77.188.90.200]) by kimmy.cmartin.tk (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9AD544617B; Sat, 1 Oct 2011 02:04:38 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Evolution 3.0.3- Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: --=-qGyCcIQp+8jTKEagoRv9 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, 2011-09-30 at 16:43 -0700, Grant wrote: > Hello, I'm trying to decide between git and subversion. Subversion > has "Path-Based Authorization" so I can give a developer access to > only specific files instead of everything. Does git have something > similar? Git's model does not allow the same type "Path-Based Authorization" that Subversion uses, because git uses secure hash sums to make sure that people don't try to sneak changes into a pull request or merge, and you can't selectively download parts of the tree because then you couldn't check that one of your remotes isn't trying to lie to you. You can do something that is (or can be) similar with git and gitolite[0] so a developer (or set of developers) only has access to a particular set of branches. Depending on what exactly you're trying to do, this can be more or less complicated to set up. If you only want a set of developers to access the subdirectory clients/importantsecretclient, then you create that directory only in the branch or branches that developer can read. There are many examples int he gitolite wiki. [0] https://github.com/sitaramc/gitolite/wiki/ HTH cmn --=-qGyCcIQp+8jTKEagoRv9 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) iQEcBAABAgAGBQJOhlkuAAoJEHKRP1jG7ZzT2PAH/RE4Vp4QfebqPkDAXHIZrh3a 6JycNVe6DfDVDgCPvwGIYcEr69PF/1CCwgQCUXpKGNnDDtPfYMBBT3ceA25s3jKO ilyVtnzC/W8oAUM/Eq+JeWxVUBH1z/PX6I42RsEsP2Iw0eqzhfpLO8Ami4UjMRes A+MB8blA7u/wLk6uMnzVFCDXzgpaUQlNXyA2FtzOhL8SeoYs/Ne/PUTuw4sdczQS TQQb8V6gquAYU01ALC1k/WJ+0thhsVVxffCl9jBC6PFg/aGn3A69eILCUA0dtf8m MrNG2tnh3eo/Kf+tfipF96CX/jg2rQU9+1pBy0md93Mi2Zmbhd8zytbc+3LFWUU= =qHuu -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-qGyCcIQp+8jTKEagoRv9--