[PD-dev] cleanup of CVS

[Alexandre Quessy]

Hi,
What about a SVN at goto10.org ?

a

2007/7/4, Chris McCormick <chris at mccormick.cx>:
> On Wed, Jul 04, 2007 at 12:56:05PM +0200, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
> > Chris McCormick wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jul 04, 2007 at 11:50:00AM +0200, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
> > >> Chris McCormick wrote:
> > 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.
>
> yep.
>
> > 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).
>
> agree.
>
> > > 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)
>
> With 1, IEM are involved and you must do the administration. With 3, they
> aren't involved, we must pay, and anyone nominated by this list can do
> the administration. I don't mind either way, as long as the job gets done
> (but I feel bad that the IEM option incurs lots of work for you).
>
> > >> 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.
>
> Yep, agree.
>
> > 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)
>
> To my mind, migrating to SVN and re-organisation of the repository are
> two separate tasks. Why not migrate first, and re-organise second?
>
> I am happy with switching to SVN on SF, but I am concerned about
> Frank's point about there being no fine grained control over directory
> permissions. However, is this much worse than what we have now? To me
> it seems it's only better because we would be using the feature rich
> SVN as opposed to CVS.
>
> > for the former, does anybody know how to handle ldap-groups in
> > subversion? is this possible at all??
>
> What do you think of Luke's suggestions?
>
> Before we do anything, we should make sure that the majority of this
> list is happy with the final decision on hosting + source control
> software.
>
> Chris.
>
> -------------------
> http://mccormick.cx
>
> _______________________________________________
> PD-dev mailing list
> PD-dev at iem.at
> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
>


-- 
Alexandre Quessy
http://alexandre.quessy.net
http://www.puredata.info/Members/aalex