On Thu, May 01, 2025 at 09:00:07PM +, Ineiev wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 29, 2025 at 04:31:30PM -0600, Karl Berry wrote:
> >
> > Don't the bots use anonymous https access, not creating an account?
> > If so, I wonder about adding all sv users to some placeholder group,
> > precisely so they can get n
On Tue, Apr 29, 2025 at 04:31:30PM -0600, Karl Berry wrote:
>
> Don't the bots use anonymous https access, not creating an account?
> If so, I wonder about adding all sv users to some placeholder group,
> precisely so they can get non-anonymous access to other groups.
Probably we can, at least af
On Wed, Apr 30, 2025 at 12:45:05AM +0200, Roi Martin wrote:
>
> Then, the change would be:
>
>SSH access is allowed for registered users who are a member of at
>least one active Savannah group. If you are not a member of any group,
>then you can use anonymous https access.
> +
> +
On Tue, Apr 29, 2025 at 5:31 PM Karl Berry wrote:
>
> and read-only access to the version control trees of other
> public groups.
>
> I never knew this was a feature. That's great.
>
It really is.
> Don't the bots use anonymous https access, not creating an account?
> If so, I wonder abo
Karl Berry writes:
> I suggest "write access to that group's version control ..."
> (i.e., s/their own/that group's/)
> Otherwise it sort of sounds like it's referring to the members' own
> personal/individual version control trees, which is confusing, since
> nothing like that exists :).
That'
and read-only access to the version control trees of other
public groups.
I never knew this was a feature. That's great.
Don't the bots use anonymous https access, not creating an account?
If so, I wonder about adding all sv users to some placeholder group,
precisely so they can get non-a
+Members of a group have write access to their own version control
+trees and read-only access to the version control trees of other
+public groups.
Not that my opinion particularly matters, but I think it's a good
improvement. Thanks.
I suggest "write access to that group's ver
Roi Martin writes:
> Ineiev writes:
>
>>> And I somehow thought that requesting access to the "emacs" group [2]
>>> would give me *read-only* access to their repositories.
>>
>> No, such a request makes the user a pending member, and pending
>> memberships don't count. Can you suggest an improv
Ineiev writes:
>> And I somehow thought that requesting access to the "emacs" group [2]
>> would give me *read-only* access to their repositories.
>
> No, such a request makes the user a pending member, and pending
> memberships don't count. Can you suggest an improvement for that page
> that wo
On Tue, Apr 29, 2025 at 02:12:22PM +0200, Roi Martin wrote:
> Actually, when I was reading SshAccess [1] in the Savannah documentation
> I found these paragraphs:
>
> SSH access is allowed for registered users who are a member of at
> least one active Savannah group. If you are not a member of
Ineiev writes:
>> fatal: unable to access 'https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/emacs.git/': The
>> requested URL returned error: 502
>>
>> Are you aware of this issue?
>
> Yes; people are working on it [*].
Great! Thanks a lot for your dedication.
>> Also, is there any other anonymous/read-o
On Sun, Apr 27, 2025 at 10:38:20PM +0200, Roi Martin wrote:
>
> In order to contribute to GNU Emacs, I configured the following remote
> in Git:
>
> https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/emacs.git
>
> However, this service has become increasingly unreliable. Running
> git fetch/pull frequently ret
Hi,
In order to contribute to GNU Emacs, I configured the following remote
in Git:
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/emacs.git
However, this service has become increasingly unreliable. Running
git fetch/pull frequently returns 502 HTTP errors and requires multiple
retries.
fatal: unable to
13 matches
Mail list logo
