South River Technologies was very prompt in getting back to me, and
provided me with a beta version of their next release. This version
apparently has a reworked WebDAV component, and as such, everything
now works fully with SVN 1.2rc2 / Apache (renames, lock/unlock, etc.)
I swear I don't work for them :) but if you are looking for a good
Windows WebDAV client (better than the limited Windows WebFolders),
WebDrive is great -- it creates a virtual drive that *any* Windows/DOS
program can save to. It makes a great compliment to an
Apache/SVN/Autoversioning server.
-Kyle
On 4/23/05, Kyle Kline <kyle.kline@gmail.com> wrote:
> Erik -- if your'e still out there --
>
> I revisited this using Apache + SVN 1.2 RC1. I found a pretty cool
> client (WebDrive:
> http://www.southrivertech.com/index.php?pg=./products/webdrive/index)
> that supports edit-in-place. This is looking very promising.
> (WebDrive is commerical but licensing looks pretty affordable.) The
> performance is great, and it would give the content authors
> transparent versioning.
>
> The only thing I can't do with WebDrive is renames. This is odd,
> since renames work fine with Win32 webfolders & Bitflex. I have
> opened a ticket with WebDrive
> (http://srthelpdesk.com/index.php?_a=tickets&_m=viewmain&emailre=kyle.kline@gmail.com&ticketkeyre=844856&_i=WZS-37841)
> since the empirical evidence would suggest it is an issue with their
> product. The log is attached to the ticket. Other than that, the
> product works great. It creates a virtual drive that *any*
> Windows/DOS program can use as a 'norma' file system.
>
> Does anyone have experience with using WebDrive + SVN/Apache for
> WebDAV w/autoversioning?
>
> Also -- is anyone else using Subversion as a virtual file system for
> managing web content with a high rate of change (ie tons and tons of
> commits through DAV)?
>
> Thanks!!!
> Kyle
>
>
> On 1/3/05, Kyle <kyle.kline@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > 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 Fri Apr 29 19:15:33 2005