Gary Poster wrote:
>> Where's the visual diff?
>> Where's the interactive log of revisions?
>> Where's the repository browser?
>
> FWIW, I don't know if TortoiseBzr has this. I'd be surprised if it
> didn't have these, especially the first two.
TortoiseSVN's log is now *very* interactive. I'd
On Apr 6, 2009, at 9:28 AM, Chris Withers wrote:
Gary Poster wrote:
Sadly, I suspect none of the tools are as advanced as TortoiseSVN.
Which
is a real shame :-( Perforce maybe? ;-)
Fair enough that bzr didn't take your fancy, but FWIW, did you try
TortoiseBzr? That has received love relat
Gary Poster wrote:
>
>> Sadly, I suspect none of the tools are as advanced as TortoiseSVN. Which
>> is a real shame :-( Perforce maybe? ;-)
>
> Fair enough that bzr didn't take your fancy, but FWIW, did you try
> TortoiseBzr? That has received love relatively recently.
I'm looking at this:
ht
On Apr 6, 2009, at 6:51 AM, Chris Withers wrote:
> Martijn Pieters wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 11:53, Wichert Akkerman
>> wrote:
Note that we are now up to svn 1.6.
>>> Which still does not fix this, and is preventing people from
>>> upgrading
>>> to the 1.5 client, and thus from u
Martijn Pieters wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 11:53, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
>>> Note that we are now up to svn 1.6.
>> Which still does not fix this, and is preventing people from upgrading
>> to the 1.5 client, and thus from using checkouts using relative paths.
>
> Bugger, that is indeed cor
On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 11:53, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
>> Note that we are now up to svn 1.6.
>
> Which still does not fix this, and is preventing people from upgrading
> to the 1.5 client, and thus from using checkouts using relative paths.
Bugger, that is indeed correct. I may not have any probl
Previously Martijn Pieters wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 10:32, Chris Withers wrote:
> > Just beware, 1.5 sucks:
> >
> > http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3242
> > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.subversion.user/84308/focus=84019
> > http://thread.gmane.org/g
On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 10:39, Chris Withers wrote:
> I'm more worried about the lack of merging working and random errors
> when adding files. Those are pretty serious failures from where I'm
> sitting...
The merging is due to lack of merging info when branching, the 'random
errors' are not rando
Martijn Pieters wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 10:32, Chris Withers wrote:
>> Just beware, 1.5 sucks:
>>
>> http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3242
>> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.subversion.user/84308/focus=84019
>> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.versio
On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 10:32, Chris Withers wrote:
> Just beware, 1.5 sucks:
>
> http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3242
> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.subversion.user/84308/focus=84019
> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.subversion.user/8734
2009/4/6 Chris Withers :
> Laurence Rowe wrote:
>>>
>>> Previously Marius Gedminas wrote:
BTW I've yet to see a firewall that blocks SSH. Am I lucky?
>>>
>>> Yes. Blocking ssh is very common in larger companies in me experience.
>>
>> An ssh server running on port 443 (HTTPS) can come in
Hanno Schlichting wrote:
> Dieter Maurer wrote:
>> Unless newer SVN versions improved on this: using different
>> access protocols is hampered by "svn:external" as they were (still
>> are?) required to be absolute urls (including the protocal).
>>
>> This way, the access protocol may change in betw
Laurence Rowe wrote:
>> Previously Marius Gedminas wrote:
>>> BTW I've yet to see a firewall that blocks SSH. Am I lucky?
>> Yes. Blocking ssh is very common in larger companies in me experience.
>
> An ssh server running on port 443 (HTTPS) can come in very handy. ssh -D
> gives you a socks pro
On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 17:48, Marius Gedminas wrote:
> This is a very good point I'd forgotten about. However, currently the
> existing svn:externals all point to read-only svn:// URLs, and switching
> them to http:// would not change anything substantially.
Nope, but switching then to https://
On Sun, Apr 05, 2009 at 09:10:10AM +0200, Dieter Maurer wrote:
> Marius Gedminas wrote at 2009-4-3 01:34 +0300:
> >On Thu, Apr 02, 2009 at 07:31:00PM +0100, Chris Withers wrote:
> >> So, svn.zope.org causes me pain at the moment:
> >>
> >> - it uses the bizarre svn or svn+ssh protocols, which I fi
Dieter Maurer wrote:
> Unless newer SVN versions improved on this: using different
> access protocols is hampered by "svn:external" as they were (still
> are?) required to be absolute urls (including the protocal).
>
> This way, the access protocol may change in between of a checkout
> (involving
Marius Gedminas wrote at 2009-4-3 01:34 +0300:
>On Thu, Apr 02, 2009 at 07:31:00PM +0100, Chris Withers wrote:
>> So, svn.zope.org causes me pain at the moment:
>>
>> - it uses the bizarre svn or svn+ssh protocols, which I find annoying
>> (ports blocked on routers, can't check with a browser, et
My 2 cents:
I like svn over https. It works reliably, and is easy to use, and
externals work as expected, etcs.
So I'm +1 on allowing https access.
That said, svn+ssh tunnels svn over ssh, and if you are in a place
where ssh doesn't work, you need to find the network admit and punch
him in the f
Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> Previously Marius Gedminas wrote:
>> BTW I've yet to see a firewall that blocks SSH. Am I lucky?
>
> Yes. Blocking ssh is very common in larger companies in me experience.
An ssh server running on port 443 (HTTPS) can come in very handy. ssh -D
gives you a socks proxy,
Previously Marius Gedminas wrote:
> BTW I've yet to see a firewall that blocks SSH. Am I lucky?
Yes. Blocking ssh is very common in larger companies in me experience.
Wichert.
--
Wichert Akkerman It is simple to make things.
http://www.wiggy.net/ It is hard to make things
Andreas Jung wrote:
>> Sure, I don't mind. It sits behind an ADSL line with puny uplink (512
>> Kbit/s), but I don't think that will be a problem.
>
> Nothing against your generous offer but I think that trac belongs as
> a central service on the central repository server.
+1, although if we wer
Marius Gedminas wrote:
> The story may be different for Windows users (as usual).
>
> +0.5 for alternatively accepting authenticated https access (I'm not the
> admin, so it doesn't cost me, but I'm also not going to use it)
>
> BTW I've yet to see a firewall that blocks SSH. Am I lucky?
Yup.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03.04.2009 17:22 Uhr, Marius Gedminas wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 03, 2009 at 03:04:47PM +0200, Martijn Pieters wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 3, 2009 at 14:41, Jim Fulton wrote:
>>> Should we all just use that?
>
> (that being http://zope3.pov.lt/trac)
>
> Sure
On Fri, Apr 03, 2009 at 03:04:47PM +0200, Martijn Pieters wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 3, 2009 at 14:41, Jim Fulton wrote:
> > Should we all just use that?
(that being http://zope3.pov.lt/trac)
Sure, I don't mind. It sits behind an ADSL line with puny uplink (512
Kbit/s), but I don't think that will be
On Fri, Apr 3, 2009 at 14:41, Jim Fulton wrote:
> Should we all just use that?
It's running trac 0.10. I'd love to see trac 0.11, which has
additional features that I miss every time I use a 0.10 trac instance,
such as the annotate view.
Also, I'd include the subversion location plugin, which in
On Apr 2, 2009, at 6:34 PM, Marius Gedminas wrote:
>
>> - the web front end is ancient and not as good as other options
>> (Trac,
>> WebSVN)
>
> +1 for having trac as a subversion browser.
>
> In fact, see http://zope3.pov.lt/trac
>
> The svn repository mirror used by that trac instance is updat
On Apr 2, 2009, at 7:35 PM, Tres Seaver wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Gary Poster wrote:
>
>> I'd like to report back on the progress that Bzr/Launchpad has made
>> addressing concerns we heard since I last brought up Canonical's
>> offer
>> to host the code and c
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Gary Poster wrote:
> I'd like to report back on the progress that Bzr/Launchpad has made
> addressing concerns we heard since I last brought up Canonical's offer
> to host the code and contribute commercial support for the transition.
>
> When I
On Apr 2, 2009, at 1:31 PM, Chris Withers wrote:
> Hey All,
...
> The other option would be to follow Python and move to Mercurial, but
> that has the same problems for me as with Bzr (no decent gui tools,
> less
> mature, etc) although it's a toolset I'll have to learn at some point
> anyway
On Thu, Apr 02, 2009 at 07:31:00PM +0100, Chris Withers wrote:
> So, svn.zope.org causes me pain at the moment:
>
> - it uses the bizarre svn or svn+ssh protocols, which I find annoying
> (ports blocked on routers, can't check with a browser, etc)
+10 for continuing to support svn+ssh, it's the
Dieter Maurer wrote:
>
> I have been told that there are mirrors of the Zope SVN repository
> providing read access via "http".
Shame none of them is advertised anywhere...
Chris
--
Simplistix - Content Management, Zope & Python Consulting
- http://www.simplistix.co.uk
Jacob Holm wrote at 2009-4-2 20:44 +0200:
> ...
>For write access I completely agree. For read-only unauthenticated
>access it would be nice to be able to use http(s). It may be possible to
>have it all at the same time.
I have been told that there are mirrors of the Zope SVN repository
providin
Dieter Maurer wrote:
> I would not like to enter my password every time I call "svn".
> If this can be arranged, I am content.
It can, and with svn 1.6 it's even secure :-)
Chris
--
Simplistix - Content Management, Zope & Python Consulting
- http://www.simplistix.co.uk
_
Chris Withers wrote at 2009-4-2 19:44 +0100:
> ...
>I prefer using password-protected (as opposed to key-protected) https.
>What do other people prefer?
I am fine with the "ssh" access.
True, the initial setup was a bit difficult (the key program
did not like the "." in "d.maurer" -- but forgot t
Jim Fulton wrote:
>
> On Apr 2, 2009, at 2:31 PM, Chris Withers wrote:
>> For me, the ideal would be simply https for everything and using http
>> basic auth for access with more people having access to update the
>> passwd file and maybe Trac or WebSVN for a nice web interface.
>
>
> I absolute
On Apr 2, 2009, at 2:44 PM, Chris Withers wrote:
>> This involves storing a key in plane text in my home directory,
>> which is terrible.
>
> How do you not have the same thing with ssh?
ssh keys are pass-phrase protected and ssh-agent allows me to enter
the pass phrase once in a session.
Ji
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 02.04.2009 20:39 Uhr, Jim Fulton wrote:
> On Apr 2, 2009, at 2:31 PM, Chris Withers wrote:
>> For me, the ideal would be simply https for everything and using http
>> basic auth for access with more people having access to update the
>> passwd file
Jim Fulton wrote:
> On Apr 2, 2009, at 2:31 PM, Chris Withers wrote:
>
>> For me, the ideal would be simply https for everything and using http
>> basic auth for access with more people having access to update the
>> passwd file and maybe Trac or WebSVN for a nice web interface.
>>
>
>
> I
On Apr 2, 2009, at 2:31 PM, Chris Withers wrote:
> For me, the ideal would be simply https for everything and using http
> basic auth for access with more people having access to update the
> passwd file and maybe Trac or WebSVN for a nice web interface.
I absolutely *hate* using https to access
Hey All,
I got bitten by the current zope subversion setup at PyCon so thought
I'd mail the appropriate groups about it. If this has been covered
elsewhere and I've missed anything, please just point me in the right
direction...
So, svn.zope.org causes me pain at the moment:
- it uses the biz
40 matches
Mail list logo