I've decided to stop fighting against the current, and move form cvs to svn ;-) , so I'm trying to set up an svn server.
Leopard ships with svnserve and apache2 - which option should I take? Has anyone managed to get a svn server running on Leopard yet?
R
On Nov 9, 2007 2:33 PM, Richard Dyce dd@dyce.com wrote:
I've decided to stop fighting against the current, and move form cvs to svn ;-) , so I'm trying to set up an svn server.
Leopard ships with svnserve and apache2 - which option should I take? Has anyone managed to get a svn server running on Leopard yet?
Just use svn+ssh and you're good to go :-)
On Nov 9, 2007, at 4:33 AM, Richard Dyce wrote:
Leopard ships with svnserve and apache2 - which option should I take? Has anyone managed to get a svn server running on Leopard yet?
Unless you need to provide access for people without accounts on your server, go with svn+ssh. This avoids the need to deal with an entire internet-facing service and since Leopard has integrated ssh-agent support it's really painless to get going: just setup a repository and where you would reference it as
file://somewhere
on your server instead use:
svn+ssh://svn.example.com/somewhere
Chris
On Nov 9, 2007, at 5:07 PM, Ramanan Sivaranjan wrote:
like the 'just' in that sentence... ;-) ... I'll see how I get on.
You may want to check out Git or Mercurial. It's a lot easier to get going I find. Setting up repositories with SVN seems overly tedious.
Ramanan.
Unless you have a specific reason for needing to use a Subversion server, I always recommend Mercurial. It's WAY easier for single-user projects. Git is better suited for seriously massive codebases, but it's a bit more complex in day-to-day life.
My reason I've stuck with svn for so long is that I use Dreamhost and they offer one-click HTTP shared subversion repo creation.
I'm planning on moving all my projects over to Mercurial eventually, but I've been too busy with the actual projects themselves ;)
—Thomas Aylott – subtleGradient—
Righto, I'll take a look at Mercurial.
(I don't think I could face using a piece of software called 'Git'.... it's a slang expression in the UK, and the formal definition is a 'pregnant camel' IIRC...)
Thanks,
R
On 10 Nov 2007, at 03:24, Thomas Aylott - subtleGradient wrote:
On Nov 9, 2007, at 5:07 PM, Ramanan Sivaranjan wrote:
like the 'just' in that sentence... ;-) ... I'll see how I get on.
You may want to check out Git or Mercurial. It's a lot easier to get going I find. Setting up repositories with SVN seems overly tedious.
Ramanan.
Unless you have a specific reason for needing to use a Subversion server, I always recommend Mercurial. It's WAY easier for single-user projects. Git is better suited for seriously massive codebases, but it's a bit more complex in day-to-day life.
My reason I've stuck with svn for so long is that I use Dreamhost and they offer one-click HTTP shared subversion repo creation.
I'm planning on moving all my projects over to Mercurial eventually, but I've been too busy with the actual projects themselves ;)
One thing - daft question probably - but mercurial will tie into TextMate, yes?
On 10 Nov 2007, at 09:50, Richard Dyce wrote:
Righto, I'll take a look at Mercurial.
(I don't think I could face using a piece of software called 'Git'.... it's a slang expression in the UK, and the formal definition is a 'pregnant camel' IIRC...)
Thanks,
R
On 10 Nov 2007, at 03:24, Thomas Aylott - subtleGradient wrote:
On Nov 9, 2007, at 5:07 PM, Ramanan Sivaranjan wrote:
like the 'just' in that sentence... ;-) ... I'll see how I get on.
You may want to check out Git or Mercurial. It's a lot easier to get going I find. Setting up repositories with SVN seems overly tedious.
Ramanan.
Unless you have a specific reason for needing to use a Subversion server, I always recommend Mercurial. It's WAY easier for single-user projects. Git is better suited for seriously massive codebases, but it's a bit more complex in day-to-day life.
My reason I've stuck with svn for so long is that I use Dreamhost and they offer one-click HTTP shared subversion repo creation.
I'm planning on moving all my projects over to Mercurial eventually, but I've been too busy with the actual projects themselves ;)
Granted svn can be a pain to set up, but is Mercurial generally accepted by the Open Source community? Right now, if someone wants to pass around a new Textmate bundle or Rails plugin, they point to an svn repo and the deal is done. I haven't looked into Mercurial too carefully, but if it's better and can be accessed by svn users transparently (riiiigggt :) then it could be a godsend.
Any thoughts on that?
On Nov 9, 2007, at 7:24 PM, Thomas Aylott - subtleGradient wrote:
On Nov 9, 2007, at 5:07 PM, Ramanan Sivaranjan wrote:
like the 'just' in that sentence... ;-) ... I'll see how I get on.
You may want to check out Git or Mercurial. It's a lot easier to get going I find. Setting up repositories with SVN seems overly tedious.
Ramanan.
Unless you have a specific reason for needing to use a Subversion server, I always recommend Mercurial. It's WAY easier for single-user projects. Git is better suited for seriously massive codebases, but it's a bit more complex in day-to-day life.
My reason I've stuck with svn for so long is that I use Dreamhost and they offer one-click HTTP shared subversion repo creation.
I'm planning on moving all my projects over to Mercurial eventually, but I've been too busy with the actual projects themselves ;)
—Thomas Aylott – subtleGradient— ______________________________________________________________________ For new threads USE THIS: textmate@lists.macromates.com (threading gets destroyed and the universe will collapse if you don't) http://lists.macromates.com/mailman/listinfo/textmate
Well, my reading of it is that Mercurial *is* the current open source choice - at least as far as Eben Moglen is concerned ;-)
http://www.softwarefreedom.org/news/2006/sep/19/mercurial/
Not sure if that's a technically good reason though....
Seems straightforward enough to use though. So far. ;-)
On 10 Nov 2007, at 17:31, s.ross wrote:
Granted svn can be a pain to set up, but is Mercurial generally accepted by the Open Source community? Right now, if someone wants to pass around a new Textmate bundle or Rails plugin, they point to an svn repo and the deal is done. I haven't looked into Mercurial too carefully, but if it's better and can be accessed by svn users transparently (riiiigggt :) then it could be a godsend.
Any thoughts on that?
On Nov 9, 2007, at 7:24 PM, Thomas Aylott - subtleGradient wrote:
On Nov 9, 2007, at 5:07 PM, Ramanan Sivaranjan wrote:
like the 'just' in that sentence... ;-) ... I'll see how I get on.
You may want to check out Git or Mercurial. It's a lot easier to get going I find. Setting up repositories with SVN seems overly tedious.
Ramanan.
Unless you have a specific reason for needing to use a Subversion server, I always recommend Mercurial. It's WAY easier for single-user projects. Git is better suited for seriously massive codebases, but it's a bit more complex in day-to-day life.
My reason I've stuck with svn for so long is that I use Dreamhost and they offer one-click HTTP shared subversion repo creation.
I'm planning on moving all my projects over to Mercurial eventually, but I've been too busy with the actual projects themselves ;)
—Thomas Aylott – subtleGradient— ______________________________________________________________________ For new threads USE THIS: textmate@lists.macromates.com (threading gets destroyed and the universe will collapse if you don't) http://lists.macromates.com/mailman/listinfo/textmate
For new threads USE THIS: textmate@lists.macromates.com (threading gets destroyed and the universe will collapse if you don't) http://lists.macromates.com/mailman/listinfo/textmate
On Nov 10, 2007, at 12:31 PM, s.ross wrote:
Granted svn can be a pain to set up, but is Mercurial generally accepted by the Open Source community? Right now, if someone wants to pass around a new Textmate bundle or Rails plugin, they point to an svn repo and the deal is done. I haven't looked into Mercurial too carefully, but if it's better and can be accessed by svn users transparently (riiiigggt :) then it could be a godsend.
Any thoughts on that?
I recommend Subversion in these cases: You're working on an existing Subversion repo (No sense switching if it works for you) You're working with people you use Subversion Any other form of necessary interoperability. EG: Most rails plugins are in subversion so that people can easily subscribe to them with svn:externals
I recommend Mercurial: For new projects with a single user For small projects that you aren't likely to share For projects that include a lot of Mac bundle files like numbers documents and such (Svn requires putting a .svn folder in every subfolder of your project. Mercurial has a single one at the root) When you must be able to work offline for long periods of time When you want to totally annoy people who know subversion ;)
For Subversion the pattern is a bit different than with Mercurial. For Subversion, since creating a repository is so painful, people tend to make a large repo that contains multiple subprojects. EG: Macromates bundle repo. For Mercurial, it would make the most sense to have a separate Mercurial project per project, or per bundle. Since it's not as easy to checkout only a subfolder of a project (afaik).
I should really move some of my existing projects to Mercurial. It really is much more of a pain to use svn but I'm just in the habbit. And I just hooked up all my repos to update an ical calendar oncommit hook. I'm not sure how to do that in Mercurial.
—Thomas Aylott – subtleGradient—
On Nov 10, 2007, at 8:13 PM, s.ross wrote:
On Nov 10, 2007, at 2:43 PM, Thomas Aylott - subtleGradient wrote:
And I just hooked up all my repos to update an ical calendar oncommit hook
Now *that's* cool!
Here's the link to make it happen: http://projects.ilovett.com/svncalendar/ A slightly modified xslt should be able to achieve the same thing with Mercurial. But I don't know xslt, not do I know if you can get hg logs as xml.
—Thomas Aylott – subtleGradient—
On 10 Nov 2007, at 23:43, Thomas Aylott - subtleGradient wrote:
[...] For Subversion, since creating a repository is so painful, people tend to make a large repo that contains multiple subprojects. EG: Macromates bundle repo. For Mercurial, it would make the most sense to have a separate Mercurial project per project, or per bundle. Since it's not as easy to checkout only a subfolder of a project (afaik).
That should maybe be listed also as a downside of Mercurial/Git.
I.e. with Subversion a project is just a directory, everything you can do with a project (branch/switch, checkout, etc.) you can do with just a single directory (and be blissfully unaware of the rest of the project).
I watched this thread for a while. I have subversion setups running with two of my customers and it's just really easy to setup, I really don't know what the painful thing is. The setups are always within-company, no need for svn+ssh, just via http is enough. Once Apache is configured correctly, it's just a matter of 'svnadmin create' to setup a new repos, and copy some standard config file into the repos. Easy to add to a script. I added some extra sweets to the script so it will setup a trac-environment as well resulting in a near perfect work environment. No need for reconfiguring Apache or whatsoever, just run the script with a single parameter (project name) and that's it. One note: my subversion repositories all live on Ubuntu servers.
I did not know about Mercurial / Git so that was interesting to read about. But as my setups need to be accessible for several programmers - some come and go - who appearantly all just happen to know about Subversion.
On 11/11/07, Allan Odgaard throw-away-2@macromates.com wrote:
On 10 Nov 2007, at 23:43, Thomas Aylott - subtleGradient wrote:
[...] For Subversion, since creating a repository is so painful, people tend to make a large repo that contains multiple subprojects. EG: Macromates bundle repo. For Mercurial, it would make the most sense to have a separate Mercurial project per project, or per bundle. Since it's not as easy to checkout only a subfolder of a project (afaik).
That should maybe be listed also as a downside of Mercurial/Git.
I.e. with Subversion a project is just a directory, everything you can do with a project (branch/switch, checkout, etc.) you can do with just a single directory (and be blissfully unaware of the rest of the project).
For new threads USE THIS: textmate@lists.macromates.com (threading gets destroyed and the universe will collapse if you don't) http://lists.macromates.com/mailman/listinfo/textmate
It would be interesting for us novices to see your Apache setup (1.3 or 2?), the standard config file, and your script. Is that sharable?
Lewy
On Nov 11, 2007 1:33 AM, R e m b e r t O l d e n b o o m < rembert@floating-point.nl> wrote:
Once Apache is configured correctly, it's just a matter of 'svnadmin create' to setup a new repos, and copy some standard config file into the repos. Easy to add to a script. I added some extra sweets to the script so it will setup a trac-environment as well resulting in a near perfect work environment. No need for reconfiguring Apache or whatsoever, just run the script with a single parameter (project name) and that's it. One note: my subversion repositories all live on Ubuntu servers.
On Nov 12, 2007, at 2:05 PM, Lewis Overton wrote:
It would be interesting for us novices to see your Apache setup (1.3 or 2?)
The original question was about setting this up under Leopard. Leopard comes with Apache 2 with mod_dav_svn already built, so the hard part is already done. You just need to make sure the mod_dav_svn and mod_authz_svn modules are getting loaded somewhere in apache's config. (I'm not sure if they are by default. Haven't poked around in there much.)
the standard config file
This is pretty basic, but on my Debian server, I keep repositories on /usr/local/svn and this makes them available via apache at http:// servername/svn/.
<Location /svn> # Enable Subversion DAV svn # Path to multiple repositories SVNParentPath /usr/local/svn # Allow anonymous read-only acccess, require auth to commit <LimitExcept GET PROPFIND OPTIONS REPORT> Require valid-user </LimitExcept> </Location>
It wouldn't surprise me if Leopard has a similar example config somewhere.
I should point out that I only use apache so anonymous people can checkout or export from my repositories, so that's all my config needs to support. Personally, I do all of my svn operations with svn +ssh.
--- Rob McBroom http://www.skurfer.com/ I didn't "switch" to Apple... my OS did.
-
Allan Odgaard -
Antti Holvikari -
Chris Adams -
Lewis Overton -
R e m b e r t O l d e n b o o m -
Ramanan Sivaranjan -
Richard Dyce -
Rob McBroom -
s.ross -
Thomas Aylott - subtleGradient