Re: [tlug] SVN: Your Environment, BerkleyDB/Web or FSFS?

[Ian Wells <ijw@example.com>]

On 11/30/05, Edward Middleton <edward@example.com> wrote:

> I moved over because I'd read that FSFS was less platform-specific.
> When you've got a machine with Windows svn binaries and cygwin ones
> and you're concerned that someone might mix and match, this is a minor
> issue.  Anwyay, it seemed to improve the performance (as would moving
> from svn 1.0 to 1.2, I imagine...)

There are two main issues with db.
* db versions are not compatiable (you need to dump and load your

Yep, I think this would have been it.  I knew I had a reason.

(Of web_dav)

You get everything that comes with apache e.g. user authentication,
access control.  It uses a standard protocol (web_dav) which is
supported (to varying degrees) by a range of clients (e.g. webfolders).
Because web_dav is based on http you can access the latest files
directly from their url's.  Its actually possiable to host a live site
on a repository.

I'm not really arguing.  What I find a mystery is why, having adapted DAV to serve the purpose, there's a completely different svn protocol around.  Its only advantage is the standalone server - I would have throught that implementing the DAV protocol with a standalone server would have been a better idea from a maintainability front.  I appreciate there are other problems with this approach, but still...

Incidentally, one svn client upgrade to 1.2.6 later:

$ svn diff -x Bw .
svn: 'Bw' is not supported

Bollocks.

--
Ian.