On 10/26/07, Douglas A. Tutty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, Oct 26, 2007 at 09:55:13AM -0700, Ted Unangst wrote: > > On 10/25/07, Douglas A. Tutty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Thu, Oct 25, 2007 at 10:19:19AM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote: > > > > Well, there is no solution. 16 was chosen a lot of years ago as a > > > > reasonable amount of state to carry around, and that's the standard > > > > and we're probably going to stick with it. > > > > > > What, then, is the correct way to separate the project files of more > > > than 16 projects, where some users will need access to all of the > > > groups? > > > > read again: there is no solution. > > > > There has to be _some_ solution but it doesn't have to revolve around > groups. Surely we don't need a separate box for every 16 projects (and > lets not get into another reason to use Xen :)) ) > > Perhaps it putting the project files in CVS for individuals to check > out. Perhaps its some database system. I don't know. I am confident > that there is a logical proper solution. > > Doug. > >
How about some simple sudo groups to a project user? If you are not using a CMS to track user edit's then you might as well just have a single user that can make changes to the project and just share that user.
