Someone should really reverse engineer BK and publish the results. It would be interesting to find out what all the real problems are with a system that can't handle a rogue client without trashing the repository.
Come on. I don't use BK, never have, but you can't fault the software for doing what it is configured to do.
If I deploy a BK or CVS, or any other types of repository and allow anonymous writes, which is what's required to "trash the repository", then I deserve what I get. The failure then would be completely mine.
If I lock it down, and the repository can be trashed via anonymous telnet, then there's a very big problem. In any case, your post is both flamebait and off-topic, since it really has no basis in reality in the context of this or other related stories.
Reverse Engineer BK (Score:1)
Re:Reverse Engineer BK (Score:3, Insightful)
If I deploy a BK or CVS, or any other types of repository and allow anonymous writes, which is what's required to "trash the repository", then I deserve what I get. The failure then would be completely mine.
If I lock it down, and the repository can be trashed via anonymous telnet, then there's a very big problem. In any case, your post is both flamebait and off-topic, since it really has no basis in reality in the context of this or other related stories.