On 11/14/06, Jan Ciger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
We use mailman right now. Potentially we could move to something different.
Right now I'm happy not to rock the boat too much.
I was hoping it'd be little more than this, but have no expertise to back it ;-)
I think we can cope with a few days off line ;-)
To deal with spam I ended up have to ditch all non subscriber posts, the cost on my time deleting spam each day was getting impossible to tolerate.
Heh, heh, Joakim just suggested this script on a osg-crew thread.
I haven't had to hack CVS. Have see a few bugs though, but no killers.
I'm happy for SVN though, its several features that the lack of in CVS makes for extra leg work.
What do you mean by mailman migration? Migration from what?
We use mailman right now. Potentially we could move to something different.
Right now I'm happy not to rock the boat too much.
If it is
just moving mailman between servers, that isn't a big deal - just copy
the installation over and few files will probably need changing due to a
different host/domain name.
I was hoping it'd be little more than this, but have no expertise to back it ;-)
Expect a disruption though - not so much
related to mailman (the changeover should be a matter of minutes) but
with standard DNS propagation issues and such. The list will be probably
a bit out of whack for a day or two until everything settles.
I think we can cope with a few days off line ;-)
I was running a mailman installation for several lists, with a bit of
customization to include spam filtering so that you do not have to go to
manually cancel spam from the moderation queue every day. However, none
of our lists was as big as the OSG lists.
To deal with spam I ended up have to ditch all non subscriber posts, the cost on my time deleting spam each day was getting impossible to tolerate.
Regarding the CVS->SVN migration - I have done that several times, the
repository conversion itself is a rather uneventful process if you use
the cvs2svn script.
Heh, heh, Joakim just suggested this script on a osg-crew thread.
Subversion itself is quite easy to setup and manage,
however it has the disadvantage that the data are stored in a database,
not as individual RCS files as with CVS where you can go into the
repository and hack them when somebody or something messes up. On the
other hand, the advantages of subversion easily outweigh this issue - I
usually needed to hack CVS repositories only because of bugs or CVS
"misfeatures" which SVN doesn't have.
I haven't had to hack CVS. Have see a few bugs though, but no killers.
I'm happy for SVN though, its several features that the lack of in CVS makes for extra leg work.
A nice tool which works with Subversion is Trac:
http://trac.edgewall.org/ - it provides source browsing, wiki and
integrated bug tracker all in one without requiring a dedicated database
(everything is stored as subversion project). I am running this for our
internal needs at the moment and it works great.
I'm open to trying out such things. Right now my priority is getting a new server up and running with mostly the same features as before. SVN being the exception as my guess is that migration from CVS->CVS then later CVS->SVN is going to be more effort than just doing CSV->SVN now.
These discussions are probably best now moved to osg-crew as we have enough interested parties to strike up a productive discussion.
Cheers,
Robert.
_______________________________________________ osg-users mailing list [email protected] http://openscenegraph.net/mailman/listinfo/osg-users http://www.openscenegraph.org/
