On 16.12.2019 16:20, Julian Foad wrote:
> Last December I observed within a blog post [1],
>
> "
> On Docker Hub [2] the most comprehensive svn server seems to be
> elleflorio/svn-server (http + svnserve). Next is garethflowers/svn-
> server (very simple; svnserve only). None seem to be an enterprise-
> grade installation.
>
> There are no 'subversion' or 'svn' packages in the SNAP store [3].
> "
>
> The packages we list on http://subversion.apache.org/packages
> are all "traditional" desktop/server operating system packages. For
> svn server deployments, I feel we are missing some options that admins
> would prefer nowadays.
>
> Does anyone here have a good feel for what would be the most widely
> useful distribution formats nowadays? Let's say we're talking about
> an admin installing a Subversion server for the first time, at a small
> to medium sized software development department.
>
> - Docker?
As much as I love to hate the idea that one should deploy a whole OS
image in order to run one server app ... Docker is still the best option
given our "no binary packages" policy. Since a Dockerfile (or a
docker-compose.yaml file) is source.
> - VM image / appliance?
> - Snap / AppImage / FlatPak?
> - ...
Far too complex and/or distro-specific, IMO.
> I want to get a feel for whether we, the Subversion community [4],
> would do well to publish one or more such option.
>
> Currently I just have a gut feeling that we should.
We should look into how, or if, other ASF projects publish their
Dockerfiles. I'd much rather have an asf/ repository at docker.io than a
subversion/ repository.
-- Brane
Received on 2019-12-16 16:33:43 CET