[PD-dev] cleanup of CVS

[IOhannes m zmoelnig]

Chris McCormick wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 04, 2007 at 11:50:00AM +0200, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
>> Chris McCormick wrote:
>>> 1. IEM? (is this an option?)
>>> pros:
>>> cons: lots of work for IOhannes.
>>>
>>> 2. savanna.nongnu.org
>>> pros:
>>> cons:
>>>
>>> 3. Rent a dedicated server.
>>> pros: we have total control.
>>> cons: we have to install and set up. costs money.
>>>
>> i do not fully understand the difference between 1. and 3.
>> we could rent a dedicated server at the IEM :-)
> 
> We can? Ok. If we rent, we would need to evaluate the different options
> for price, features, etc.

organizatorical i don't know whether this would be possible (from the
university side).

but puredata.info _is_ a dedicated server (not just a vhost or something).
so the difference between 1 and 3 is, that the iem pays for #1 while
somebody else would have to pay for #3.

i have the impression (being administrator of this server), that we
(that is: the pd-community) do have full control of puredata.info.
obviously not everybody has root access to this machine, but i doubt
whether it would be a good idea to give everyone root-access to a rented
server (#3).

> 
> I was under the impression that the IEM option was IEM donating server
> resources with yourself doing the administration.

yes you are correct, but how does this differ from 3 (see above)

> 
>> as for savanna: how is this different from just staying at sourceforge?
> 
> We know the SF sucks. Do we have evidence that Savanna sucks?

i do not have evidence that savanna sucks.
but i'd rather have evidence that it does not suck, before going there.

> 
> Let's add an option:
> 
> 4. Stay at sourceforge but transition to SVN.
> pros: easy.
> cons: SF sucks.

honestly, i think it does not suck so badly. (they _did_ have hardware
problems last year, which was unbearable; but this could happen to every
hoster, be it savanna, iem or sourceforge.)



i still vote for either staying at sf or going to iem.
the main reason for this is the user-migration.


somebody should come up with a good layout ofthe svn-repository
(actually i think that this is the point where all the former attempts died)


and finally one call for help to all those subversion/ldap experts out
there:
an administrative problem i do have at puredata.info is, how to handle
permissions (that is: write-access to sub-branches of the repository)
effectively.
i would like to give a diffuse group of "developers" (which are all
members of an LDAP-group) write access to the entire repository, except
for some special branches, e.g. pd-vanilla, where only miller (and some
admins) have write access.
i guess the simplest way to acchieve the latter (special permissions on
sub-trees) would be to just manage an access.conf file via the
puredata.info homepage.

for the former, does anybody know how to handle ldap-groups in
subversion? is this possible at all??




mfga.sdr
IOhannes