1 |
On Sun, 2008-05-11 at 22:02 +0200, Fabian Groffen wrote: |
2 |
> On 11-05-2008 20:57:29 +0100, Alan Hourihane wrote: |
3 |
> > So, should svn serve access just be disabled, so people know to use |
4 |
> > https access only ?? |
5 |
> |
6 |
> It has just been fixed again. |
7 |
> |
8 |
> Problem here is: infra wanted me to switch you all from http(s):// to |
9 |
> svn://. I went to the pain to do that (Portage ebuild has some nasty |
10 |
> die code for that). Now I'm just confronted with a buggy svn:// |
11 |
> protocol, and infra not planning to retain http(s):// at all on a new |
12 |
> box. What's my only option left? Telling you guys to switch back to |
13 |
> https:// for as long as we can still enjoy it. In the meanwhile I'm |
14 |
> working on an rsync server though to get rid of this nonsense forgood. |
15 |
|
16 |
Yes, I think we should stick with http(s) for as long as we can enjoy |
17 |
it, as svn is just impossible anyway. |
18 |
|
19 |
Once the new box is in place, then switching to svn is the only option. |
20 |
|
21 |
It's good that you are working on a replacement though. |
22 |
|
23 |
Thanks! |
24 |
|
25 |
Alan. |
26 |
|
27 |
-- |
28 |
gentoo-alt@l.g.o mailing list |