> -----Original Message-----
> From: twb_at_elba.apache.org [mailto:twb_at_elba.apache.org] On Behalf Of Trent
> W. Buck
> Sent: Monday, September 09, 2013 11:38 PM
> To: users_at_subversion.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Breaking up a monolothic repository
>
> Les Mikesell <lesmikesell_at_gmail.com> writes:
>
> > On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 7:23 PM, Trent W. Buck <trentbuck_at_gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> Ryan Schmidt <subversion-2012c_at_ryandesign.com> writes:
> >>
> >>> As someone used to Subversion's usually sequential revision numbers,
> >>> that bugs me aesthetically, but it works fine.
> >>
> >> I think that's the crux of it.
> >
> > Have you checked if the users have/need anything (emails, ticket
> > system, etc.) that refer to specific revisions or the history of
> > changes made there? It seems kind of drastic to throw that away
> > because you think the numbers aren't pretty enough.
>
> That is an extremely valid point. I'll check.
>
> >>Also part of the reason to split up the repos is to make access
> >>control easier, and it looks bad if Alice (who should have access to
> >>project 1 but not project 2) can see Bob's old commit metadata to
> >>project 2, even if she can't see the commit bodies after the split.
> >
> > How does this work now in the combined repository?
>
> Right now, they don't have it with the combined repo. Anyone in the svn group
> can read everything. (This is one of the reasons they want to break up the
> single repo into per-project repos.)
You should knock the reason off the list. You can set up path based authorization fairly easily. (especially compared to braking it up into multiple repos.)
BOb
Received on 2013-09-10 23:36:50 CEST