Re: latest svn book?

2017-07-20 Thread Daniel Shahaf
Todd Armstrong wrote on Wed, 19 Jul 2017 19:22 +: > There’s a 1.8 draft in the nightly build section of that page with a 2016 > copyright that I’ve been using. > > It’s not available in PDF form yet, though. Requests for a PDF version should be addressed to the book's mailing list (svnbook-.

Re: Apache httpd 2.4 + Subversion 1.9.5 + LDAP combination does not work on CentOS 7.x

2017-07-20 Thread Daniel Shahaf
Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote on Wed, 19 Jul 2017 22:08 -0400: > This subscriber is new, and having difficulty with Apache > configurations. Since that's so often been so awkward, and this is > *another* reason to migrate away from it, I made sure that *he* > thought about the functional, less complex to

Re: Apache httpd 2.4 + Subversion 1.9.5 + LDAP combination does not work on CentOS 7.x

2017-07-20 Thread Nico Kadel-Garcia
On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 11:04 PM, Nathan Hartman wrote: >> On Jul 19, 2017, at 10:08 PM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: >> >> Yup. I don't do it every week, or even every month. Frankly, as >> Subversion has been falling in popularity, > > I think that's like the BSD is dying myth. While it's true that

Re: 【wait on line】weird question about svnsync

2017-07-20 Thread Nico Kadel-Garcia
Better deduplicaton? And did you exclude old branches with bulky binaries in them? On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 7:07 AM, Dummy <3295285...@qq.com> wrote: > dear subversion: > I have a weird question about svnsync: > i svnsync gzrepos(centos 6.4-svn1.6.11) to gz-mirror1(centos 7-svn1.9.5), > when it wa

Re: Apache httpd 2.4 + Subversion 1.9.5 + LDAP combination does not work on CentOS 7.x

2017-07-20 Thread Nathan Hartman
On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 9:05 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: > On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 11:04 PM, Nathan Hartman > wrote: > >> On Jul 19, 2017, at 10:08 PM, Nico Kadel-Garcia > wrote: > >> > >> Yup. I don't do it every week, or even every month. Frankly, as > >> Subversion has been falling in popul

svn vs. git

2017-07-20 Thread Johan Corveleyn
Not wanting to start a flame war, but for all svn users and admins out there that sometimes need to have this conversation ... I found this to be a very nice website: https://svnvsgit.com (I'm not affiliated with the website, just ran into it) -- Johan

Re: svn vs. git

2017-07-20 Thread Nathan Hartman
On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 3:41 PM, Johan Corveleyn wrote: > Not wanting to start a flame war, but for all svn users and admins out > there that sometimes need to have this conversation ... I found this to be > a very nice website: > > https://svnvsgit.com > > (I'm not affiliated with the website, j

RE: svn vs. git

2017-07-20 Thread Scott Aron Bloom
From: Nathan Hartman [mailto:hartman.nat...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2017 14:39 To: Subversion Subject: Re: svn vs. git On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 3:41 PM, Johan Corveleyn mailto:jcor...@gmail.com>> wrote: Not wanting to start a flame war, but for all svn users and admins out there th

Re: 【wait on line】weird question about svnsync

2017-07-20 Thread Eric Johnson
This could be for a number of reasons. Perhaps your original repository is an older format? If that's the case, and your mirror is a newer format, then the newer format could be packing and finding binary duplicates much more effectively than is possible using the older format. Eric. On Thu, Jul

Re: svn vs. git

2017-07-20 Thread Daniel Becroft
We did a similar comparison as well, and again stuck with SVN. However, this was predominantly due to the challenge of getting devs to relearn a whole new process (we had enough trouble migrating from lock-modify-unlock to a checkout/modify/commit workflow). We did like the off-line process, and t

Re: svn vs. git

2017-07-20 Thread Paul Hammant
> > Code review is the main one, but this is driven by github.com more than > git itself, I guess. > That was the game changer wasn't it. Github's platform had built in code-review with the pull request conce

Re: svn vs. git

2017-07-20 Thread Evan Driscoll
On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 4:38 PM, Nathan Hartman wrote: > On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 3:41 PM, Johan Corveleyn wrote: >> >> Not wanting to start a flame war, but for all svn users and admins out >> there that sometimes need to have this conversation ... I found this to be a >> very nice website: >> >>

Re: svn vs. git

2017-07-20 Thread Xin LI
Since the article mentioned FreeBSD (I'm a FreeBSD developer, and I use both git and subversion everyday), I think I need to point out that the author have missed some important pain points. My biggest pain point with subversion is that 'svn up', 'svn st' and 'svn diff' take much longer time compa

Re: svn vs. git

2017-07-20 Thread Branko Čibej
On 21.07.2017 00:01, Scott Aron Bloom wrote: > > I was forced by a third party company to work with them on a github > based project. Boy was it painful… But I must say, one thing I did > *LIKE * was the “offline” mode, of commit vs push. > > > > To me, it would be interesting and a very nice e