On 27.01.2011 01:56, Johan Corveleyn wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 11:42 PM, Stefan Sperling<stsp_at_elego.de> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 11:25:59PM +0100, Stefan Fuhrmann wrote:
>>> Hi @all,
>>> I'm planning to merge said branch Monday 7th.
>>> Speak now or forever hold your peace.
>>> I've been testing / using that code for a while now
>>> and am reasonably confident that it works. And it
>>> is not exactly rocket science, either.
>>> Because a large portion of my other performance
>>> work builds upon that low-latency caching feature,
>>> it would really like to see it being merged. Directly
>>> after the merge, I will make the feature strictly opt-in
>>> instead of defaulting to a 16 or 64 MB cache.
>> I'd say merging to trunk is perfectly fine if you're confident that
>> there aren't any roadblock issues and it's not enabled by default anyway.
>> We've released optional new features in the past (e.g. libsvn_serf).
>> It's much more likely to get tested this way :)
> Would there be a way to opt-in with a mod_dav_svn server? IIRC, you
> have added some configuration options for svnserve, but not yet a way
> to configure it with an apache server (unless I missed something).
> Maybe you or someone else can add the necessary configuration
> directives or anything else that needs to be done for this ...
My intend is to add Apache config file support.
We use mod_dav_svn only in my company, so
I have a vested interest in supporting that setup ...
> I wouldn't want to miss out on the caching benefits, but for now I
> wasn't too worried because I was content with a default of 64 MB.
It's more about defaulting to "no extra risk".
Received on 2011-01-28 00:00:34 CET