launchpad-dev team mailing list archive

[Guilherme Salgado <salgado@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, 2010-08-24 at 08:34 +0100, Julian Edwards wrote:
> On Monday 23 August 2010 21:44:01 Guilherme Salgado wrote:
> > And that means we don't need to accept binary-only uploads on the
> > security policy either, right?
> 
> The security policy is redundant, we can remove it entirely.

Cool; I'll do that.

> 
> >   'anything': the name says it all, but it's used just for tests and
> > none of our tests do mixed uploads anymore.
> 
> There's also 'absolutely-anything'.

Right; I omitted it because it was just a variant of 'anything' which
also accepts unsigned changes.

> 
> > We could replace, then, the 3 attributes with a single enum and simplify
> > things a bit, but I'm not sure whether or not we'll want policies
> > accepting mixed uploads to accept source-only or binary-only uploads (in
> > which case the enum wouldn't make much sense, I think). What do you guys
> > think?
> 
> I think it can be reduced to a bool!  But a 2-state enum is more future proof.

Right, but my concern is that we might need a policy that accepts both
mixed uploads and source-only (or binary-only) uploads.  In that case
we'd need a 3rd and maybe a 4th state (e.g. MIXED_AND_SOURCEFUL), but
maybe that's still better than the 3 different variables we have now?

-- 
Guilherme Salgado <https://launchpad.net/~salgado>

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part