Hi Logan, I've filed a ticket for us to investigate offering SSH tunnels.
To make performance acceptable using SSHFS, you can try to deselect the "Show badges with working copy changes" and "Refresh when local changes are made" options in Versions' preferences. With those options off, you'll have to manually refresh your working copy every time you want to see if anything changed or not, but it should prevent Versions from causing a bunch of network traffic —and making you wait for it— whenever it thinks something inside your remote working copy changed. One problem, also in the long term, is that I'm concerned that offering SSH tunnels to setup working copy bookmarks from within Versions is not going to do very much for performance. That's just a — slightly— educated guess, we'll have to investigate a bit further before we really know. Two other things that don't help are: - Adding SSH tunnel support in Versions would require some drastic changes to the way the Browse view works, meaning a lot of engineering time is needed for this feature. - This is a very uncommon feature request compared to some other requests we have received. (You're not the first or only person to ask for ssh tunnels, but there are several orders of magnitude more request for, for example, merging support) Summarizing: We'll definitely investigate, but I can't promise when we will get around to that, or if the investigation will lead to anything fruitful. I'm sorry if my answer –for now– is disappointing. All the best, - Dirk the Versions team On Apr 6, 11:53 pm, llbbl <[email protected]> wrote: > Dirk, > > Thanks for replying! Sorry for the delay. > > I have setup SSHFS on the mac and it still very slow, especially for > listing directory contents, which translates to really slow times for > Versions. We also have issues our Samba; using Versions over samba is > slow and can cause lead to errors when doing something as simple as > svn up. > > So the big advantage to having a SSH tunnel to working copies inside > Versions would be the speed. Not everyone can access their working > copy via samba nor do they have a local development environment so > they can make their changes to the working copy locally. This would > make your product much more useful for a wider range of people, which > I think will translate into more sales for you! > > Thanks! > > Logan > > On Mar 22, 1:04 pm, Dirk Stoop <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi Logan, > > > SSHFS seems like the best way to access the working copy on your > > development server 'locally'. > > > I don't see a big advantage in offering SSH tunnels to access working > > copies over ssh from within Versions, because it does not seem very > > useful to only be able to access the working copy from within the SVN > > client, but not from other tools you use locally on your working > > machine, like your text editor of choice, etc. > > > Maybe I'm misunderstanding what exactly you're looking for, if so, > > please enlighten me. > > > Thanks! > > - Dirk > > > the Versions team > > > On Mar 18, 9:41 pm, llbbl <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > anyone else? > > > > On Mar 6, 10:39 pm, llbbl <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > ssh tunnels to working copies so I don't have to setup webdav or sshfs > > > > to my development site(s) since samba is out of the question > > > > > kkthnkx --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Versions" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/versions?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
