PQM needs to take over the world

[Ian Clatworthy]

Rob,

Here's a good example of why I'd like you/us to promote PQM a bit more.
Maybe it needs a bit more polish or doc first, but it really is an
important part of the overall DVCS solution we're championing and teams
are looking for.

Ian C.

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [Agile Teams, Open Software, Passionate Users] Comment:
"Version Control: Plug-ins vs Toolkits"
Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 20:57:53 +0000
From: John Reese <ian.clatworthy at internode.on.net>
Reply-To: nuclear_eclipse at leetcode.net <nuclear_eclipse at leetcode.net>
To: ian.clatworthy at internode.on.net

New comment on your post #23 "Version Control: Plug-ins vs Toolkits"
Author : John Reese (IP: 129.21.38.100 , devxps.rit.edu)
E-mail : nuclear_eclipse at leetcode.net
URL    : http://leetcode.net
Whois  : http://ws.arin.net/cgi-bin/whois.pl?queryinput=129.21.38.100
Comment:
I think the biggest thing holding me back from adopting a DRCS,
specifically Bzr or Hg, is the lack of user administration features for
using the system in a centralized fashion.  One of the greatest features
of Subversion is that it can handle all of its own user authentication
and security access, especially on a repository by repository basis.
This means I don't need to rely on other tools to deal with user
authentication and access, such as Apache's hideous .htpasswd scheme
(for Hg), or setting up ssh accounts and keys for each project (for
either).

When I'm hosting my projects and repositories, especially in a
shared-hosting environment (specifically Dreamhost), I don't like having
to monkey around with a whole bunch of .htpasswd files, and I certainly
don't like the prospect giving community members ssh access to my
server, regardless of how well I know them.

If one DRCS system could come out with it's own authentication mechanism
akin to Subversion, and preferably integrate into Apache as well, I
would switch over in a heartbeat.  But until then, Bzr, Hg, etc just
create too many administration headaches for my taste, and they just
aren't feasible.  I love the speed, flexibility, and offline abilities
of Bzr and Hg, but I can't swallow the nightmare of giving access to my
co-developers.  It's just too much of a pain in the ass.

But still, good job on Bzr, it is still developing very nicely and
quickly, and I look forward to the day I can switch over to it!  Cheers.

You can see all comments on this post here:
http://ianclatworthy.wordpress.com/2007/07/18/version-control-plug-ins-vs-toolkits/#comments