[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: Alternatives for remote access?

From: Karl Fogel <kfogel_at_newton.ch.collab.net>
Date: 2002-08-29 22:54:04 CEST

"Darryl Melander" <djmelan@sandia.gov> writes:
> The bottom line for me is that my project will not be able to use Subversion
> until remote access is possible with an access protocol other than ra_local
> and ra_dav. I have other concerns as well, but this is an absolute
> show-stopper for my organization. I believe that the tight coupling between
> web server and repository is a HUGE negative, one that will allow CVS to
> retain the upperhand for many (if not most) of those currently hosting a CVS
> repository.

You don't have to run Subversion's web server on port 80. You can
have your usual web server running on port 80, and Subversion on some
other port (we do this on http://www.red-bean.com:8080/, for example).

Heck, you can even run it on CVS's port 2401 if that's what your
firewall requires, although of course it won't speak the CVS protocol.

We're just considering Apache 2.0 to be part of the server code -- one
of many things you need to run Subversion. This seems reasonable to
me, since it doesn't have to interfere with your other server(s).

Is there some other reason (besides the port interference non-issue)
why this is a showstopper for you?


To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Aug 29 23:13:51 2002

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.