On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 15:10, Tech Geek <techgeek12345_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>>The other way you could do this, if you insist upon PartA & PartB being
>> separate repositories, is to have a different <Location> >block for each
>> project, and specify SVNParentPath as /var/lib/svn/ProjectB . Then you could
>> have PartA & PartB set up as separate >repositories - albeit with a lot more
>> management overhead as you add projects/repositories, and potentially more
>> confusion.
>
> You mean something like this?
> <Location "/svn">
> DAV svn
> SVNParentPath /var/lib/svn/projectA
> SVNListParentPath On
> AuthBasicProvider ldap
> AuthType Basic
> AuthzLDAPAuthoritative off
> AuthName "Subversion Repositories"
> ......
> ......
> require valid-user
> </Location>
>
> <Location "/svn">
> DAV svn
> SVNParentPath /var/lib/svn/projectB
> SVNListParentPath On
> AuthBasicProvider ldap
> AuthType Basic
> AuthzLDAPAuthoritative off
> AuthName "Subversion Repositories"
> ......
> ......
> require valid-user
> </Location>
No, you would need
<Location "/svnA">
<Location"/svnB">
> Would be nice if someone already has a script (that excepts the name of the
> repository) that does the job of entering the <Locaiton> block in the apache
> configuration file.
>
> Also why svn does not support nesting paths (logical empty folder) under
> repository location. I am sure many people might have encountered simialar
> issues especially if they have existing projects before they started using
> subversion.
I think you're getting confused about the relationships between
"projects" and repositories, and introducing many more layers than
needed.
As I asked earlier, why must PartA & PartB in a given project be
separate repositories? Why is the more conventional approach not
workable for you?
Received on 2010-10-20 21:16:25 CEST