Les Mikesell wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-10-04 at 17:01 -0400, Ruslan Sivak wrote:
>
>>> Just curious... Why would you want 2 different working copies
>>> synchronized without committing to the repository and updating?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> We are using the working copies on the production server for our web
>> site. They provide easy and fast updates (deployments) to the code.
>>
>
> That seems to me like a good reason for making the only way to
> change it be through the repository so you always have a clear
> history. I wouldn't want a way to modify production without
> committing first unless you have fast-changing binaries like
> weather maps. Can't you ssh an 'svn update' on the server when
> you want something new to appear there?
>
>
We don't modify production (except in an emergency) except through svn.
We do go on and do an update on one of the servers, and currently (as we
are on windows), it propagates the changes to another server. I really
don't want to have to replicate the changes manually, especially if we
are going to add more servers to the farm.
Now so far, most things that I see for linux are as good as the
microsoft product /or better. DFS has it's weaknesses, but it's just
awesome when you have small updates that need to be propagated. I can't
believe that linux doesn't have anything similar.
Russ
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Oct 4 23:21:35 2006