Community technical support mailing list was retired 2010 and replaced with a professional technical support team. For assistance please contact: Pre-sales Technical support via email to sales@march-hare.com.
Rogier Eijkelhof wrote: > The main thing that confuses me, is that cvsnt seems to be very > system-related, in the sense that cvs user and repository names are > related in some way to actual users and paths on the particular system > where the cvs repository is hosted. I don't get this, what do these two > have to do with eachother? I think that's just the way it's always worked. Tony has recently added a repository name to act as an alias to split this the way you're thinking. > Suppose I want to move the repository to > another machine, wouldn't it be more logically if I can just copy the > database, launch the cvsnt server app, tell the users to use a new > address and that's it? > > Why do cvs users need to be related to system users, it seems to make > much more sense to me if a list of users (plus their access rights) > would be specified within the cvs database. The particular system it's > running on should be totally transparent. The goal of CVSNT was to be integrated with NT, and an integrated user DB makes sense. The passwd file is still supported if you want a transportable user database. > As far as user access rights are concerned, I have been using Source > OffSite a long time ago and besides it's vast lack of essential features > (OS other than windows, internet access, etc) I really liked its ability > to config each user's access rights. You could specify per user what > files & dirs he could read+write, just read, or not see at all. Is this > also possible with cvsnt, or do I have to mess around with win2000 user > rights to simulate this? See the lsacl and setacl commands, as well as readers and writers config files (in the CVSROOT). You can also do it with Win2000 user rights, but then you'd have to use the Win2000 user database ;) -- Glen Starrett