On 08/27/2014 05:58 PM, Bob Archer wrote:
>> -----Original Message----- And I hate to repeat myself, but I'll
>> repeat for the third time this question: if file:// is not intended
>> to be used, then what are the available options for those who need
>> a version control system and can't set up a server?
> Does the file server support SSH?
There is no file server. This discussion is about local repositories on
a local system (a workstation) managed and accessed by a single user.
> Be definition you have a server since the files are on it. Just run
> the svnserve deamon on it even if it is your workstation.
This is the problem. I doubt anyone who claims this is a reasonable
approach has even considered the problem and thought about how the
solution is simply unacceptable.
For example, picture the scenario where someone tries to pitch
subversion to a version control newbie to use for such basic tasks such
as track changes to a file tree present on his file system:
newbie: "this version tracking thing sounds neat. how do I track this
svn supporter: "well, you start off by installing Apache and
mod_dav_svn on your desktop, register a dedicated user account to run
the server, and setup a subversion server. Don't forget to read these
books on the basics behind server management, or else you risk getting
hit by a myriad of security problems..."
Do you believe this is acceptable? Even plain old rsync -a is a far
better alternative than this.
Frankly, this approach makes no sense. It makes much more sense and
much more efficient to simply abandon subversion and migrate to pretty
much any version control system. I'm not aware of any other system who
forces users to install, manage and run servers just to track changes
made to a file. How is this acceptable?
Received on 2014-08-28 10:24:23 CEST