On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 9:40 AM Julian Foad <julianfoad_at_apache.org> wrote:
> Branko Čibej wrote:
> > Nathan Hartman wrote:
> >> If there is a defined "reference system," that makes it possible to
> >> focus on making that configuration as turn-key as possible, and also
> >> to document it as well as possible.
>
> If I understand correctly, the point is to concentrate on one system in
> our efforts to improve the experience of running Subversion, so that we
> avoid diluting our efforts with discussing and accommodating the
> differences between systems.
I think you understand my point but just to be extra clear, I'd like to
emphasize that I'm *not* suggesting to let other systems fall by the
wayside. We would continue having buildbots on different platforms, support
building on different platforms, etc. You would still have infinitely many
possible ways to configure and run a Subversion server, including locally,
svnserve, and httpd.
But: The reference system would be one particular configuration known to
work, with all the kinks ironed out. It would be the system that
documentation writers of a "Subversion Administration" manual could focus
on without diluting their exposition. If someone has trouble with their
system, we could ask "what are you doing differently from the reference
system?" and they'd have a reference point for comparison.
Cheers,
Nathan
Received on 2020-01-10 16:07:32 CET