Re: Re: Server choice?

On 2007-10-18 Reedick, Andrew wrote:

> > And +1 you can even rely on your distro to keep it up to date
> > for you.
>
> Upgrading or patching your company's version control system
> normally requires an act of [insert your favorite diety here]
> due to the potential risk(s). (Data loss, corruption, higly
> visible downtime seen from peons to VPs, possible changes to
> scripts, tar, feathers, pitchforks, ...) It's more of a +0.

That's a good point. We haven't yet migrated our group over from
CVS and I've seen the pain involved in upgrades to it (upgrades
just don't happen).

And building-the-world for Subversion is actually the place I'm
stuck in at $JOB since we are forced to use some IT-supported
archaic distro which wouldn't have any reasonably recent binaries
anyway.

But I like to think your point is more valid with something like
CVS; not so much with Subversion. Surely we already have backups
in case something does actually go wrong. But the couple
upgrades I've had to do (on small scale projects) were seamless
AFAIR.

The thing about Subversion is that it's growing features so fast
that I think most people will want to upgrade to 1.5, and
probably again with 1.6. IOW, on a regular basis. If you're on
a mainstream current distro you might just get the update for
free without having to rebuild the world. Sure you'll want to
test that offline, but it's a potential +1 in my book. And you
won't necessarily need to upgrade all your users' clients.

At least for my personal hosting I'll continue to let Ubuntu
handle the upgrades for me. Hope they incorporate 1.5 next year!

-- 
                          _ _     ___
                          |V|icah |- lliott
                          " "     """
mde_at_MicahElliott.com            <><             http://MicahElliott.com
PGP: 0x7C07CBF0          ICQ: 369060435      Linux/Ubuntu: 417195/12440
HackerKey: v4sw6YUPCJhw5ln5pr7OPck2ma9u8Lw3m5l6Ui2e7t3b8LDMOen6a3XsMRr5