I could be wrong, but wouldn't syncing to apache CVS involve /less/
bandwidth than downloading a complete release? You can tell CVS to use
compression and it's only sending diffs rather than the complete file.
Diffs could be larger if they remove a lot of text but I would imagine
that on average it would involve less data, no?
Not saying you're wrong or unjustified in your comment necessarily -
bandwidth use is not something I have to worry about - I'm just wondering.
Julian
John Barstow wrote:
>>Yup. And, I wouldn't use the current snapshot as you need a commit
>>from about an hour ago anyway. -- justin
>
>
> Guys, I'm paying NZD 0.20/MB. Keeping up with Subversion HEAD I can justify
> (even though the commit that touched every file was, um, ugly). Keeping up
> with Apache (and/or APR) HEAD is a lot harder to explain than "the latest
> release".
>
> I don't mind builds being broken by supporting the latest release; I *do*
> mind having builds broken by dependence on unreleased builds of
> already-released software.
>
> In other words, I can justify the bandwidth cost of downloading Apache
> 2.0.44, because it's a new, official release that subversion requires. I
> *cannot* justifying sync'ing to the Apache HEAD at regular intervals, even
> for major bugfixes. I'm already the biggest bandwidth hog in the company as
> it is.
>
> Just a note from an individual in a small island nation with limited
> bandwidth.
>
> John C Barstow
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
>
--
julian@beta4.com
Beta4 Productions (http://www.beta4.com)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Jan 6 23:17:24 2003