We have recently looked at VisualSVN, available here
<http://www.visualsvn.com/server/download/>
It comes with SVN 1.5.x, an integrated https-enabled Apache installation
and uses windows authentication for access rights, configurable with a
nice GUI. As a bonus, you get a much easier installation of Trac, if you
like to have subversion repository access in a browser and an issue
tracking system.
We tested it against an existing playground repository (created with SVN
1.4.2) of amost trivial size. Our production repository is (of course)
not so trivial and is running with SVN 1.4.2 and once we decide to
upgrade SVN to 1.5.x, we will also consider using VisualSVN since almost
all our servers run on windows.
Regarding performance, i can not supply any hard facts, but in theory
Apache should supposedly be faster to react on requests than the
svnserve process. Since there are a gazillion huge projects out there
running SVN via apache, i wouldn't spend too much time comparing
performance, just go ahead and try it. You always have the option to run
Apache and svnserve in parallel, so just go for it and have your LAN
clients access svn via svn:// urls for a time, then use http:// urls
instead and see if it makes a difference.
Robert
Ilan Yaniv wrote:
>
> Hi all.
>
> Currently in my company we have SVN server installed on windows machine.
>
> It is a Windows server without APACHE installed.
>
>
>
> From what I understood it is much easier to Admin the server with
> access rights etc using the Apache server installed.
>
> 1) Is it true?
>
> 2) If I have the server running and I want to install this
> Apache, what is the procedure? Will it affect the developers?
>
> 3) If I am using the Apache server will it make my SVN server to
> work faster\slower\no affect?
>
> 4) Where can I find best practices data about managing SVN server?
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Ilan Yaniv****
>
>
>
>
>
Received on 2008-11-13 11:31:45 CET