[muscle] Re: MUSCLE in public downloadable repository?
- From: Vitaliy Mikitchenko <vitviper@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: muscle@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2003 22:21:16 -0700
I have a CVS server that could be accessible to the public, but I cannot
guarantee 24 hour uptime (I'll turn it off at night when I go to sleep
sometimes). But that would mean giving ppl access to my own secret code...
right? Anybody know the specifics of CVS? Can I restrict access to my own
code and allow access to another repository?
At 05:53 PM 8/7/2003 +0000, you wrote:
>Maybe someone could setup a CVS server with the muscle source and have
>one or more people in charge of syncing with the main code base.
>
>My 2 bits...
>Jeremiah Bailey
>
> > Hi David,
> >
> > LCS maintains the muscle source on our private CVS server, along with
> > a l=
> > ot of=20
> > other closed-source LCS code. I could ask my sysadmin about allowing
> > =20
> > anonymous read-only access to the muscle repository if you like, but
> > I'm =
> > not=20
> > sure if it's possible to allow that for just one repository (and I am
> > sur=
> > e=20
> > they wouldn't want to allow anonymous access to the rest of our
> > sources! =
> > =20
> > :^)). I'm also not clear as to what the advantages of read-only CVS
> > acce=
> > ss=20
> > would be over just downloading and unzipping the latest released
> > muscle.z=
> > ip=20
> > file. Perhaps you can describe what benefits you see in having CVS
> > acces=
> > s?
> >
> > Jeremy
> >
> > >Hey, by the way, why can't MUSCLE reside in a "public" CVS
> > > repository?
> > >
> > >Wouldn't that be pretty nice?
> > >
> > >Cheers,
> > >David Svanberg
Other related posts:
