Colloborating via NFS vs. umask

[Matt Mackall]

On Tue, Dec 18, 2007 at 02:37:57PM +0000, Georg Sauthoff wrote:
> Bryan O'Sullivan <bos at serpentine.com> wrote:
> > Georg Sauthoff wrote:
> 
> >> How do you work in NFS-based environments with mercurial?
> 
> > Don't.  Use HTTP or ssh instead.  NFS gives terrible performance, and
> > its file locking and caching semantics are not trustworthy.  (Maybe they
> > are in principle, but in practice it's never been hard to find different
> > operating systems with interop bugs.)  Just don't go there.
> 
> ok - I have to look into the http-setup then. But I fear that the
> user management is a bit complicated (because we don't have
> kerberos available, and the co-devs don't appreciate to learn new
> passwords etc.).
> 
> Is it possible to directly clone a local repository to
> http-destination (if the user has enough priveleges)?
> 
> Btw, yesterday I hacked a umask extension for Mercurial ;).
> Basically you can specify via
> [umask]
> umask = 007
> a specific umask for mercurial, or if this is not present,
> mercurial chooses a umask depending on the permissions of the
> parent directory.

There was a patch floating around (from Alexis?) that instead picked
up a umask from the permissions on .hg/. I think this was probably the
right approach (and something we could enable everywhere), the patch
just never got finalized.

-- 
Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.