From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Grant Subject: Re: Does git have "Path-Based Authorization"? Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2011 20:34:43 -0700 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE To: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sun Oct 02 05:34:49 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 1RACpF-0004Wy-9o for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Sun, 02 Oct 2011 05:34:49 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751618Ab1JBDep convert rfc822-to-quoted-printable (ORCPT ); Sat, 1 Oct 2011 23:34:45 -0400 Received: from mail-ey0-f174.google.com ([209.85.215.174]:40775 "EHLO mail-ey0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750963Ab1JBDeo convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Sat, 1 Oct 2011 23:34:44 -0400 Received: by eya28 with SMTP id 28so1996843eya.19 for ; Sat, 01 Oct 2011 20:34:43 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=UkniQ8Icy/WbAYyiF+IoaBIdzfmv3E/S9dahwzDcyTs=; b=OgBG76AFXUGkM0KnnhvaN02eetOfFNyj/UbAtcqSlz+MuMnMKPYzdjLvXhcigFtVUF Nnm44RWp/W+3Y0g7WQkiWKv1bl2Iw0KME6t7pPpBIWFBfCIlY/xrmMP1VHFI/FZ2jHud uDFvXTsm/ZRMGeXVhKr9vWks0EosnlWyAKKBQ= Received: by 10.213.19.20 with SMTP id y20mr384667eba.27.1317526483367; Sat, 01 Oct 2011 20:34:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.213.4.136 with HTTP; Sat, 1 Oct 2011 20:34:43 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: >> How would something like that work in a case like mine where I have = a >> series of maybe 100 files and I only want to give my developer >> read/write access to one or a few files at a time with no read or >> write access to any of the other files? =A0Wouldn't setting up a >> different repo for each set of files be difficult to manage? > > The write part is easy. Just setup hooks to reject updates on those > files (however, notice the offline nature of git, people may commit > locally and the push later, you may need to check commit time on your > hooks). > > The reading part is hard, especially the way you put it ("at a time")= =2E > The only way I can think of is to not download those objects and try > to fetch from central repo every time the objects are read, > essentially turn git into a central scm again. Git does not support > this and may never do unless there's an reasonable use case. > > So I have to ask, why do you do it this way? Once you give read-acces= s > to a developer, he/she can always save the files somewhere, revoking > read access later on would be useless. That's true. I hope to be able to give different developers access to different parts of the code. I really don't know if this will work. I just don't want my code to be stolen and I'm trying to find some way to prevent that from happening. - Grant