Any which way, no matter how well tested subversion is; the fact that various 3rd parties are willing to mirror our development repositories has proved invaluable, and tragic when requests for those mirrors weren't available (in time). Let's get the details worked out long before we all agree that the official apache-1.3 or -2.0 repository sources are hosted in SVN.
No complaints with the protocol, implementation or tools. Just a very realistic view of how much we need external mirrors. Bill At 08:52 PM 6/7/2004, Garrett Rooney wrote: >Brian W. Fitzpatrick wrote: > >>>Badda bing, badda boom. So my rsync fears were unfounded, it appears >>>it is trivial to mirror the repository? >>> >>>I'm much more comfortable with that news. Is this more or less bandwidth >>>intensive than simply rsync'ing the repository files themselves? >> >>Much much much much more. A tag in Subversion is an O(n) operation. >>checking out a tag is not. >>We need to get something in place to provide for rsync or rsync-like >>capabilities. > >Perhaps making dumpfiles available (maybe diffy Subversion 1.1 style dumps once >they're released), or providing a libsvn_fs_fs version of the repository for rsyncing. > >Although since the ASF is using one large repository some hybrid might be best, >dumping and loading into smaller fsfs repositories for each project which are >available for rsyncing? > >Whatever way is chosen, I don't think making bdb style repositories available for >rsync will do much good, too many platform/bdb version issues to make it bulletproof. > >-garrett
