Colloborating via NFS vs. umask

[Georg Sauthoff]

Matt Mackall <mpm at selenic.com> wrote:
>> > Georg Sauthoff wrote:
[..]
>> 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.

Hm, I don't see why picking up .hg helps. If you have a umask
like 0077, .hg is 0700 ...

Anyway, I would appericiate some movement in this umask area. And
I could imagine, that I am not the only one, who is working in
multiuser environments, where this matters. Is there is a ticket-ID
for this umask patch? I couldn't find one with a quick search.

Btw, it seems just calling os.umask inside the mercurial process
is not enough for all cases. With my extensions enabled, a few
files (like .hg/{requires,dirstate,...}) are still created with
0600 permissions ...

Best regards
Georg Sauthoff

-- 
Fortune : 'Real programmers don't comment their code.
           It was hard to write, it should be hard to understand.' ;)