Comment 3 for bug 213032

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

khiltd wrote:
> In what way would this complicate the model? Why can't you simply
> generate a unique ID for each user who commits to a repository and then
> maintain a separate (versioned) table of users that maps these numeric
> IDs to localized names and email addresses which can be updated as
> needed? Obviously one user can choose to commit from multiple computers,
> so a means of replicating this ID would be required, but I can't imagine
> that being much more work than adding another agrument to 'whoami'.
That means you would have to have a (versioned) table that needs to be
distributed across computers and there would have to be a protocol
that can propagate the new identities associated with a particular id.

This sort of thing can be done, but it is nontrivial to implement and
there are lots of issues surrounding it - how do you tell who can
update the email address associated with a particular id, for example?
> Or even better, use keys instead of IDs. This would bring with it the
> added benefit of being able to run the faster smart server wide open,
> knowing that only specific users who have a Bazaar issued
> cert/cookie/key would be granted commit rights.
>
> Not being able to update an email address is a pretty big strike against
> Bazaar in my book.
None of the distributed version control systems support this AFAIK.

Cheers,

Jelmer

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQCVAwUBSDt3KQy0JeEGD2blAQLLRQP/Xrpm0aKPI4G6oMgraH0roqDMRw3XYsOf
iMKVcthDSxahfpEMR5+YH6OrjvfrDl49LW96H/E/ORhpwoK2xl2eYg79mekD8TJC
62dyvVqUPf2sm6PNyykXDVPSRxFuuHObX0r3F7eNLqt6fpUXRxDwdVKOKKmRJGeX
PwGFDZv0dyk=
=U+z7
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----