On Feb 17, 2011, at 10:49 AM, Barrett, Brian W wrote: > Why did "we" make this change? It was originally this way, and we changed it > to the no-auth way for a reason.
Are you obliquely saying that there's a reason to have no-auth https access? DongInn and I changed it because we're still having a problem with svnsync on the OMPI repo: ----- % svnsync init --username jsquyres file://`pwd`/foomirror https://svn.open-mpi.org/svn/ompi % svnsync sync file://`pwd`/foomirror [...MUCH output and about 12 hours...] Transmitting file data ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................svnsync: REPORT of 'https://svn.open-mpi.org/svn/ompi': Could not read chunk size: Secure connection truncated (https://svn.open-mpi.org) % ----- I did some googling and (re)discovered a bug report that DongInn and I submitted long ago about svnsync: http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3080 The guidance from the SVN developers was to have one method for open+closed (i.e., anon RO access, except for the closed trees) and have a 2nd method for auth-only. I checked with DongInn and we had never followed up on their guidance. I figured we might as well do that as a first step and see if that solved the svnsync problem. Unfortunately, it didn't. DongInn is still investigating. -- Jeff Squyres jsquy...@cisco.com For corporate legal information go to: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/
