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

Re: SVN best practice for content authors

From: Kyle <kyle.kline_at_gmail.com>
Date: 2005-01-03 21:54:29 CET

> Have you considered mounting your subversion repository as a webdav
> share? You can enable writing to it using the mod_dav_svn
> Autoversioning functionality.

Erik -- thank you for the response! This is an interesting idea.

The only thing that concerns me is the writeup in the manual on this
-- http://svnbook.red-bean.com/en/1.1/apcs03.html -- copy/edit/recopy
would probably be a hindrance to productivity since all our devs are
using Win2K & WinXP clients.

On Sun, 2 Jan 2005 21:00:21 +0100, Erik Huelsmann <ehuels@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 10:06:09 -0500, Kyle <kyle.kline@gmail.com> wrote:
> > All,
> >
> > My company is evaluating chucking SourceSafe in favor of SVN. We have
> > been using SVN as a pilot for several months for our .NET projects and
> > have had a great experience with it, absolutely no issues. (running
> > the 1.1.x series + TortoiseSVN & Ankh) -- branching/merging are
> > *wonderful* esp. when coming from SourceSafe.
> >
> > The unique challenge in chucking SourceSafe is that we have a team of
> > content developers (HTML, graphics, etc.) who are using
> > Interdev/SourceSafe to develop content. They can hit "Save" in their
> > editor, then "Refresh" in their browser and their changes are
> > immediately visible. They do not need any parts of the advanced
> > source control (branching, merging, etc.) -- just a stable way to keep
> > a history.
>
> Have you considered mounting your subversion repository as a webdav
> share? You can enable writing to it using the mod_dav_svn
> Autoversioning functionality.
>
> HTH,
>
> Erik.
>
> >
> > Some factors:
> > - Interdev is only used as a text editor with integrated scm (SS), so
> > it is not necessary once SS goes away
> > - They need to maintain their Save/Refresh development style
> > - There content development team is small
> > - They cannot develop locally on their boxes because we do some
> > dynamic content processing that requires the content be served from a
> > web server
> >
> > My current thinking is to use a shared working copy. IE, they work on
> > a working copy that is also the copy the web is served from. This
> > gives them Save/Refresh, plus the ability to have basic source
> > control. I have tested this out with a few devs here, and it works.
> > I know that a shared working copy is less than ideal, but remember,
> > this is a unique scenario -- their basic need is to edit & rapidly
> > test changes AND have some sort of basic source control. It is rare
> > for two devs to be working in the same directory/area, so collisions
> > would be minimal.
> >
> > I have searched the archives and really can't find anything related to
> > this. Does anyone have any experience or insights on this?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Kyle
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
> >
> >
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Jan 4 00:37:22 2005

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Users mailing list.