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

Re: should we really ship serf as default for 1.7? (was: Re: serf and sourceforge.net don't get along)

From: <kmradke_at_rockwellcollins.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 08:48:26 -0500

Stefan Sperling <stsp_at_elego.de> wrote on 06/24/2011 08:06:28 AM:
> Subject: should we really ship serf as default for 1.7? (was: Re:
> serf and sourceforge.net don't get along)
> On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 09:17:37PM -0400, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> > On 06/22/2011 07:30 PM, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> > > Bolstridge, Andrew wrote on Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 14:51:37 +0000:
> > >> Absolutely. The first thing to do is provide serf as a 2nd option,
> > >> make a big song and dance about how great it is, and basically
> > >> advertise the fact that it is there (from a user perspective).
> > >
> > > Didn't we do it as early as the 1.4 release notes?
> >
> > Well... not really. We've been referring to ra_serf as an
"experimental DAV
> > access module" for quite some time, as recently in release notes as
1.5 and
> > certainly with no fanfare then or since.
> I am still uneasy about this.
> Given the number of issues that have been filed against ra_serf
> and issues that I've personally been running into when using it (all
> reported to dev@), I am still not convinced that ra_serf is stable
> enough to be the default for 1.7.

Is anybody using serf with negotiate authentication? I can't get it to
work with a 1.6.5 server using mod_auth_kerb and negotiate.

The server sends the 401:

WWW-Authenticate: Negotiate
WWW-Authenticate: Basic realm="my realm"

correctly, but serf just keeps re-sending the same original
request. Works fine if negotiate is removed, and works fine either way
when switched to use neon.

I tested with the collabnet 1.7.0-dev build r1136035. User agent shows:
SVN/1.7.0-dev serf/0.8.0

Kevin R.
Received on 2011-06-24 15:48:58 CEST

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.