You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@subversion.apache.org by Jeff Stuart <js...@computer-city.net> on 2003/04/17 02:16:39 UTC
Which is better to use:(was Re: SVNServe / SSH)
Ok, which is better to use? Better as defined as easy to use, easy to secure, faster, less likely to cause corruption to repository, etc? ra_dav via Apache 2 and SSL or ra_svn via SSH?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: Which is better to use:(was Re: SVNServe / SSH)
Posted by Garrett Rooney <ro...@electricjellyfish.net>.
On Wednesday, April 16, 2003, at 10:41 PM, Jeff Stuart wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Apr 2003 22:23:38 -0400 Garrett Rooney
> <ro...@electricjellyfish.net> wrote:
>>
>> On Wednesday, April 16, 2003, at 10:16 PM, Jeff Stuart wrote:
>>
>>> Ok, which is better to use? Better as defined as easy to use, easy
>>> to
>>> secure, faster, less likely to cause corruption to repository, etc?
>>> ra_dav via Apache 2 and SSL or ra_svn via SSH?
>>
>> "it depends (tm)"
>>
>> ;-)
>>
>
> I should have probably prefaced this with the following: I am
> currently using ra_dav via Apache2 which I currently have. I'm just
> wondering if it makes any sense to switch over to ra_svn.
do you have any complaints about ra_dav and apache2? if not, then why
switch? if you do, then perhaps looking at ra_svn is worthwhile, but i
can't tell you one way or the other if i don't know what problems you
have with ra_dav.
-garrett
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: Which is better to use:(was Re: SVNServe / SSH)
Posted by Jeff Stuart <js...@computer-city.net>.
On Wed, 16 Apr 2003 22:23:38 -0400 Garrett Rooney <ro...@electricjellyfish.net> wrote:
>
> On Wednesday, April 16, 2003, at 10:16 PM, Jeff Stuart wrote:
>
> > Ok, which is better to use? Better as defined as easy to use, easy to
> > secure, faster, less likely to cause corruption to repository, etc?
> > ra_dav via Apache 2 and SSL or ra_svn via SSH?
>
> "it depends (tm)"
>
> ;-)
>
I should have probably prefaced this with the following: I am currently using ra_dav via Apache2 which I currently have. I'm just wondering if it makes any sense to switch over to ra_svn.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: Which is better to use:(was Re: SVNServe / SSH)
Posted by Garrett Rooney <ro...@electricjellyfish.net>.
On Wednesday, April 16, 2003, at 10:16 PM, Jeff Stuart wrote:
> Ok, which is better to use? Better as defined as easy to use, easy to
> secure, faster, less likely to cause corruption to repository, etc?
> ra_dav via Apache 2 and SSL or ra_svn via SSH?
"it depends (tm)"
;-)
easier to use? svnserve is considerably easier to set up than
mod_dav_svn
easier to secure? do you already have ssh infrastructure? then ra_svn
over ssh would be pretty easy. if not, probably about equal IMHO.
faster? ra_svn is currently faster.
less likely to cause corruption? that's pretty much impossible to
answer. i mean if we knew one of them was definately able to cause
corruption, we'd have fixed it.
overall, ra_svn wins in simplicity and speed (at the moment anyway),
ra_dav wins in features (you can do a whole lot with apache if you
learn how) and in stability (it's had more people hammering on it for
longer).
all IMHO of course. try both out and see for yourself, just to be sure.
-garrett
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org