What is the reason for NOT SELF-HOSTING Naviserver repository?
Working with multiple hosting providers i can tell from my experience
that their solutions are not better or more reliable than well-thought
server setup that is installed in any datacenter. As SF shows, disk
failure can bring down the whole system with days of repair time. And
this is not the first time, looks like their disaster plans are not well
prepared.
As for SVN, we switched our production system about year ago, without
any problems and working with SVN is much better experience, in my
opinion the switch is worth it. Client-server model is fine here,
especially for small teams, if server is available from anywhere, i see
no problem.
Andrew Piskorski wrote:
On Thu, May 11, 2006 at 07:48:37AM +0200, Bernd Eidenschink wrote:
Is it worth considering alternative server, subversion maybe?
with subversion, do you think of just changing from CVS to the revision
control system "subversion" or to another server with CVS/subversion?
Looks like the subversion RCS had less outages on SF than CVS, but this might
just be because of less users using subversion on SF.
Switching from CVS to Subversion solely because, at the moment,
SourceForge seems to have better uptime on their Subversion than their
CVS servers makes no sense at all.
For those interested in such things, I recommend checking the Tcl Core
list, they are currently discussing exactly these SourceForge issues,
planning their "escape plan" from SourceForge in case that should
become necessary, whether they should switch from CVS and if so to
what, etc. I agree entirely with what D. Richard Hipp said here:
http://aspn.activestate.com/ASPN/Mail/Message/tcl-core/3124041
However, Naviserver has a MUCH smaller project team than Tcl,
therefore Naviserver should be much more reluctant to move from a free
hosted service like SourceForge onto self-maintained servers. In
fact, I would not recommend self-hosting for Naviserver AT ALL (except
for backup).
But if there are some other SourceForge-like services, that would be
worth looking into, at least as a fallback in case SF's service gets
worse rather than better. Surely there are many, many other folks in
the same boat though, I wonder what they think?
--
Vlad Seryakov
571 262-8608 office
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.crystalballinc.com/vlad/
