[Users] Problem when checking out ET-dev

[Frank Loeffler]

Hi,

On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 10:06:17AM +0000, Ian Hinder wrote:
> Why do we need to have this distinction in the first place?  Can this
> be decided when you try to commit instead?

Yes and no. For some repositories we could do this, e.g. for most (all?)
of the subversion repositories. The only difference between URL and
AUTH_URL there is the encryption which is required for commits. It also
does work for anonymous checkouts, it's just a bit slower. At some point
we decided to use plan http, since we had to have a district AUTH_URL
for other repository types anyway, see below.

For others, like currently used git or hg repositories, the method to
obtain the code is completely different depending on whether you want to
use write access or not. This is not an issue of the VCS used;
subversion has the same issue when used over ssh.

We very likely have to accept that the way to checkout/clone
repositories as anonymous user can in practice be different than
developer access. The remaining question is only how to, at the same
time: (i) Make GetComponents usage easy for new users and (ii) Make
GetComponents usage easy for developers as well.

I believe that the current mechanism which doesn't ask with '-a' given
and does without is a good solution. New users most probably follow the
tutorial using copy&paste anyway, and pick up the option through that.
One portion of the tutorial was adapted to that only recently. However,
I would be happy to hear about other, better solutions.

Frank

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://lists.einsteintoolkit.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20111220/73a499c4/attachment.bin