Fwd: Re: Subversion - Proposal

[Enrico Zini]

On Sat, Dec 25, 2004 at 09:34:44PM +0200, Sean Wheller wrote:

> <snip what="proposal-outline"/>
> > This all sounds good, and I think it would be a smart way to move when
> > we move the repository.  I am really hoping for a move soon as the
> > hardware it is on right now seems to not be handling the load very
> > well.  If anyone has a solution for moving this soon please let us
> > know, and if any Canonical people can help please do.
> OK that's one in agreement. Any others.
> Regarding hosting. I think it should be at Canonical.

Summary of my reply (it seems like I write too much, so I'll try making
summaries :) :

 - If I don't hear anything bad, I'll proceed to move everything inside
   a directory "trunk" tomorrow morning (Taiwan time) while you all are
   sleeping, so noone is affected.  I'll also announce on IRC before I
   do it, so if you're working late, you'll see it coming :)
 - Migration to Canonical machines will happen, some time after new
   year's day

------------------------------------------

Full reply, point by point:
 - Create standard layout: I'm all for doing it, and I can take care of
   it.  I usually use a structure like this:
   userguide
     trunk
     branches
     tags
   quickguide
     trunk
     branches
     tags
   so that it is possible to branch and tag separately the various
   different projects, but in this case we don't necessarily have
   different subprojects, so it also makes sense to keep everything
   together.

   If I don't hear anything bad, I'll proceed to move everything inside
   trunk tomorrow morning (Taiwan time) while you all are sleeping.
   
 - Implement svn hooks
   We've already been thinking about this, but we never managed to do
   it.  The possibility of migrating the repository into Canonical
   machines also gave the idea that it may have been more efficient to
   spend time on this after the migration, to avoid doing things twice.

 - Migration to Canonical machines
   I asked Elmo about the status of svn migration to Canonical webfarm
   and chatted a bit with him about it, trying to sync with the current
   status of the situation.  We won't have the svn repo in Canonical
   machines before beginning of next year, as Elmo is in vacation for a
   week until new year's day.

 - Hot backup
   I don't know much about it: is it a feature of subversion?
 
 - Setup stdin  and stdout (svn://)
 - Spawn svn as service from inetd
   I don't know too much about server-side subversion, so I need more
   clues here: at the moment we already have full access to the
   repository using HTTP and DAV, and there is not much load on the
   server as committers are rather few.  What would these two changes
   mean?

   

Ciao,

Enrico

--
GPG key: 1024D/797EBFAB 2000-12-05 Enrico Zini <enrico at debian.org>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-doc/attachments/20041226/1b7d80b1/attachment.pgp>