Re: Perforce vs CVS

On Wed, Jul 26, 2000 at 03:23:59PM +0100, Nick Ing-Simmons wrote:
> Russ Allbery <[email protected]> writes:
> >Adam Turoff <[email protected]> writes:
> >
> >> 	Perforce has no native network security model.  Security is handled
> >> 	through ssh and other such tricks.
> >
> >CVS shares this drawback.  You don't ever want to use pserver for anything
> >other than anonymous access to the repository; for any commit access, you
> >want to handle the security with ssh or some other similar system.
> 
> But the ssh issue is exactly what has caused the perception that perl5
> perforce depot is "closed" - getting one's ssh key registered was not 
> as easy as it could/should have been.

I don't see why we should not require ssh for developers that have
write access and allow anon read-only access without ssh. But I get
the feeling that most want CVS as the anon interface. Of course we can
always do both.

Graham.