Andi Vajda wrote: > On Thu, 9 Nov 2006, Heikki Toivonen wrote: > I know, I know.... the logic is incomplete though, if svn tends to be > unavailable more often than builds, then putting all eggs into the svn > basket > would be unwise. I sure don't know that that is the case, I was just not > convinced by the argument...
I don't understand that logic. Currently: svn | builds | can checkout and build ===================================== no | no | no no | yes | no yes | no | no yes | yes | yes All in svn: svn | builds | can checkout and build ===================================== no | no | no no | yes | no yes | no | yes yes | yes | yes >> Like I mentioned, when you use svn+ssh. By its nature it encrypts the >> connection and verifies that nothing changes over the wire. > > How is that more secure than downloading source tarballs over ssh, https ? It isn't, but we are downloading the tarballs over http, not ssh or https. We could probably make downloads reasonably easy over https (would need to enable SSL on builds, checkin a cert to chandler/ and make curl use that cert when doing the SSL checks.) > My main concern is that I'm not sure svn is such a great tool for > handling large files. I could be wrong... If we follow this route, I believe my tests showed that download speeds should not be an issue. If you want me to run other tests I'd be happy to. -- Heikki Toivonen
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Open Source Applications Foundation "chandler-dev" mailing list http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/chandler-dev
