Hi all,
I ran into the following problem when checking out the development version of ET:
----------------------------------------------------------------- Checking out module: Carpet/doc from repository: ssh://carpetmercurial@carpetcode.org/carpet into: Cactus/arrangements carpetmercurial@carpetcode.org's password:
I had no problem checking out the development version of Carpet following http://www.carpetcode.org/get-carpet.html. Does anybody know a solution?
Michael
Hi Frank,
On Dec 19, 2011, at 10:45 PM, Frank Loeffler wrote:
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 10:26:22PM +0100, Michael Pürrer wrote:
I ran into the following problem when checking out the development version of ET:
Did you use the '-a' option to GetComponents?
No I didn't. Using '-a' fixes the problem.
The option is not listed at http://einsteintoolkit.org/download/, but it is mentioned here: https://docs.einsteintoolkit.org/et-docs/Tutorial_for_New_Users.
Thanks, Michael
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 10:54:02PM +0100, Michael Pürrer wrote:
No I didn't. Using '-a' fixes the problem.
The option is not listed at http://einsteintoolkit.org/download/, but it is mentioned here: https://docs.einsteintoolkit.org/et-docs/Tutorial_for_New_Users.
I fixed this. The option was not given for obtaining the development version, but I suppose using it is necessary without write permissions.
Thanks for reporting this problem.
Frank
On 19 Dec 2011, at 21:54, Michael Pürrer wrote:
Hi Frank,
On Dec 19, 2011, at 10:45 PM, Frank Loeffler wrote:
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 10:26:22PM +0100, Michael Pürrer wrote:
I ran into the following problem when checking out the development version of ET:
Did you use the '-a' option to GetComponents?
No I didn't. Using '-a' fixes the problem.
The option is not listed at http://einsteintoolkit.org/download/, but it is mentioned here: https://docs.einsteintoolkit.org/et-docs/Tutorial_for_New_Users.
Should "-a" be the default?
Hello all,
Hi Frank,
On Dec 19, 2011, at 10:45 PM, Frank Loeffler wrote:
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 10:26:22PM +0100, Michael Pürrer wrote:
I ran into the following problem when checking out the development version of ET:
Did you use the '-a' option to GetComponents?
No I didn't. Using '-a' fixes the problem.
The option is not listed at http://einsteintoolkit.org/download/, but it is mentioned here: https://docs.einsteintoolkit.org/et-docs/Tutorial_for_New_Users.
Should "-a" be the default?
Being one of those users that don't have write permission to everything (or at least do not have all of their ssh keys loaded into the agent all the time): yes I'd appreciate this :-) That would necessitate an option to force non-anonymous (ie. rally authenticated) checkouts, wouldn't it. Does such an option exit?
Yours, Roland
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 10:55:52PM +0000, Ian Hinder wrote:
Should "-a" be the default?
I think the idea is that GetComponents should ask the first time it encounters a new service for a user name or anonymous checkout. For some reason it doesn't do this here. The '-a' switch prevents this interactivity, which should make it easier for new users.
We might not need to make -a the default, but should rather find out why it apparently didn't give the choice of authentication.
Frank
On 20 Dec 2011, at 03:37, Frank Loeffler wrote:
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 10:55:52PM +0000, Ian Hinder wrote:
Should "-a" be the default?
I think the idea is that GetComponents should ask the first time it encounters a new service for a user name or anonymous checkout. For some reason it doesn't do this here. The '-a' switch prevents this interactivity, which should make it easier for new users.
We might not need to make -a the default, but should rather find out why it apparently didn't give the choice of authentication.
Wouldn't it be better for new users if they weren't exposed to this? It's only relevant for a small number of users. Having to answer an irrelevant question for a number of repositories when you first check out is a bit unfriendly.
How easy is it to switch between an authenticated and an anonymous checkout once the checkout has been completed?
Why do we need to have this distinction in the first place? Can this be decided when you try to commit instead?
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 5:06 AM, Ian Hinder ian.hinder@aei.mpg.de wrote:
On 20 Dec 2011, at 03:37, Frank Loeffler wrote:
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 10:55:52PM +0000, Ian Hinder wrote:
Should "-a" be the default?
I think the idea is that GetComponents should ask the first time it encounters a new service for a user name or anonymous checkout. For some reason it doesn't do this here. The '-a' switch prevents this interactivity, which should make it easier for new users.
We might not need to make -a the default, but should rather find out why it apparently didn't give the choice of authentication.
Wouldn't it be better for new users if they weren't exposed to this? It's only relevant for a small number of users. Having to answer an irrelevant question for a number of repositories when you first check out is a bit unfriendly.
There is no question if people use "-a" (and apparently if a bug in GetComponents is corrected).
How easy is it to switch between an authenticated and an anonymous checkout
once the checkout has been completed?
It basically requires "relocating" the repository.
Why do we need to have this distinction in the first place? Can this be
decided when you try to commit instead?
This would be a nice idea. Instead of anonymous and authenticated access we specify the commands for read and write access, and whatever is required under the hood becomes part of GetComponents.
-erik
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
users@lists.einsteintoolkit.org
-
Erik Schnetter -
Frank Loeffler -
Ian Hinder -
Michael Pürrer -
Roland Haas