brett+roundcubeforum.net wrote:
I'm not advocating a move to a different server/system, just giving thoughts.
While a move would possibly benefit us, what are some possible work arounds?
Would we be able to create a read only CVS account that we could use instead?
Is that possible?
yes, but SF doesn't allow that by policy afaik.
alternatively, one could upload cvs snapshots on a regular basis to the file
area.
Apart from people cheering in the audience, nothing was heard from someone
who actually has an up2date working copy. I guess they don't want any
people testing new roundcube features anymore.
That's a fairly harsh statement.
I did that on purpose - I know they want testers but there is an issue that
*they* need to fix (either SF or roundcube committers). Unless an action is
taken, nobody is able to test new code, and this hurts *RC* more than me (or
any tester).
the point I'm trying to make is that while I get the idea that the problem is
acknowledged, nobody is trying to solve it. The only thing *I* can do is
remind people and provide alternative solutions (which I can).
They do want testers, but it's out of their hands with SF running the CVS.
> Yes, we could change, but I'm sure Thomas doesn't have the time to devote
> to changing everything over from CVS to SVN or from one server to the next.
> I don't know how much time goes into it, but it can't be easy.
I have personally done this for 2 major projects (the entire Xfce project -
over 20000 commits in 25 different trees, and I still maintain all project
access and administrate it). While it takes some time, I could probably
convert roundcube's CVS tree into a workable SVN repository in 20 minutes. I'm
willing to do that (and maintain). But I need (developer) CVS access for this,
or even better, a full CVS repository backup tarball (which SF is supposed to
export for you on request through some system, so developers: go export me a
repo backup tarball and post it online and I'll convert it as a test for you all).
Cheers,
Auke
