On 19.06.2014 05:11, Geoff Field wrote:
>> From: Nico Kadel-Garcia
>> On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 9:35 PM, Geoff Field wrote:
>>
>>> In our duplication effort, we also set all the permissions
>>> on the old repositories to read-only, to limit the chances
>>> of cross-contamination.
> Just to be clear, I'm not talking about the FILE permissions
> here, merely the SVN access permissions. To be really clear,
> the original repositories are only being kept as a paranoia
> measure, just in case our customers (or legal representatives)
> require unsullied history at some indefinite time in the future.
>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Geoff
>> This. So much this. When people want to keep, and keep
>> cross-merging, the contents of multiple distinct live
>> repositories while work is being replicated and cross-merged
>> from all of them, it's usually time to look for a new job:
> The vast majority of those repositories have been unused for
> some years, and our development team is (now) small enough so
> that I can guarantee there was no work proceeding on any of
> them. Naturally, I also shut down SubVersion while it was in
> progress, just in case.
>
>> someone has been excited by the shiny tools and forgotten
> Ooh, shiny ... What were we talking about? ;-)
>
>> "source control is a 24x7, it must *work* and work *every
>> time*" resource.
> Quite right. That's why our repositories are on a RAID system
> (now a SAN, actually) with regular backup (including off-site).
Finally some SANity! You'd be surprised at how many SVN admins forget
that it's probably *the* best option. :)
-- Brane
--
Branko Čibej | Director of Subversion
WANdisco // Non-Stop Data
e. brane_at_wandisco.com
Received on 2014-06-19 10:10:49 CEST