[Spread-users] Public CVS?

[Theo Schlossnagle]

On Tuesday, September 18, 2001, at 12:49  AM, Jon Stevens wrote:
> So far, none of these questions have been answered:
>
> #1. What is the reason for not allowing anonymous CVS access?

This has been answered.  Because they don't want it.  I may not agree 
with it either, but frankly, it just doesn't effect my life very much.  
I put in my ssh key and now it works.

They want to know who is looking at the source.  Someone said "it is not 
a good way of determining who is looking at the source."  No one claimed 
it was.  There is no good way.  This is as good as any.

> #2. Why is it that the spread.org people want to track usage so 
> carefully?

I an in the lab there.  I am not a Spread maintainer.  I am the 
maintainer of mod_backhand and work on the wackamole project as well.  I 
personally want to know who is using the stuff so that I can include 
that in the information presented those responsible for managing our 
grants.  NO NAMES are given out.  I can say X number of people from Y 
different companies have shown enough interest to download it.

> #3. Is the usage information going to be made public? #3a. If so, then 
> when?

Not individual names, no.  Numbers... I don't see why not.  I would be 
happy to give you usage numbers on mod_backhand :-)

Visit: http://www.backhand.org/images/mbusage.gif

> #3b. If not, then what will that information be used for?

See #2.

> #4. Why is it that a product for which the source code is available to 
> the
> public needs to have controlled CVS access?

Good question.  Why is it that it should have uncontrolled access?

> #5. When will cvsweb/viewscvs be setup and made available to the 
> anonymous
> public?

I don't know.  Perhaps Jonathan and/or Yair could shed some light on 
that.

> #6. Can someone please answer the questions with a straight answer?

Straight answers are easy.  Answers that you seem to like are harder to 
fine.  A straight answer to "why?" is "because."  I personally agree 
with you on most of the points you are making (like anon CVS access 
would be beneficial).  But, I _really_ don't understand how this is so 
inconvenient?  You could have requested AND receive 100 ssh accounts for 
CVS access by now...

--
Theo Schlossnagle
1024D/82844984/95FD 30F1 489E 4613 F22E  491A 7E88 364C 8284 4984
2047R/33131B65/71 F7 95 64 49 76 5D BA  3D 90 B9 9F BE 27 24 E7