Stas Bekman wrote:
Philippe M. Chiasson wrote:
Stas Bekman wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- % cvs -d:pserver:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/home/cvspublic login
- (use the password "anoncvs")
- % cvs -d:pserver:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/home/cvspublic co modperl-docs
+ % svn co http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/perl/modperl/docs/trunk modpe
I thought we were first trying to figure out what's the best way to go (on the dev list). I'd prefer to see https:// here. So let's agree on things first, before we change those back and forse. Thanks.
Nah, in this case, telling users to checkout modperl thru http will be just fine. They will simply get the docs/ and Apache-Test/
externals out as https without even needing to know/notice. So no harm in recommending http for read-only for at least the
modperl repository itself.
Developers (especially the new ones) will get burned by this. I suggest we use https:// everywhere.
Well, if by developers you mean the people with rw access to the repository, I don't think it'a a big deal to tell
them to use https instead of http, just like developers right now with cvs need to switch from anoncvs to ssh tunneled
cvs. Or am I getting this wrong ? In either case, the simple thing is:
Read-only access, pick one of http/https, same difference Read-write access, pick https.
Personally, if people think this might be confusing, I have no strong objections to recommending https across the board.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
