2012/11/19 Tim Lyons <guy.linton@gmail.com>
I wasn't arguing that the old sourceforge repository should be retained [1]
(sorry Paul).

I recognise that sourceforge has decided to abandon the old repository
framework, and we are at the mercy of their decisions. There is not much
point in keeping the old repository when it is clearly not up to date, and
it was always clear that sourceforge was abandoning it.

I think that we have been badly let down by sourceforge's decision to change
to a new framework. Not only do there seem to be some faults in the
framework (for example, the error message [2]) but also the new framework
does not automatically support ViewVC. However, I realise that we are
entirely at the mercy of the decisions made by sourceforge, and there is
very little we can do about it. I suppose that some of the decisions are due
to the recent take-over, and perhaps things will get worse! But, after all,
we don't pay for sourceforge, and economics tell us that you get what you
pay for!

I do not agree that there are "various desktop applications which can give
you equally helpful views with much faster response than ViewVC ever could"
[3]. While there are desktop applications, they cannot be as fast as ViewVC.
For example, to do a comparison of historic versions, they have to request
construction and download of the versions, and then compare them. This
cannot be faster than constructing the historic versions on the server, and
downloading only the diff. I have tried some desktop clients, and they are
not as responsive as ViewVC in other respects too. Besides, I liked the
ViewVC User Interface - though such things are subjective.

So, my views are:

(1) I would encourage investigation as to whether ViewVC can be implemented
in the project's webspace, although I recognise that "it will be a long road
if we try to get ViewVC running while Allura is still young in the
Sourceforge ecosystem" [3]

As you say, viewvc will be fast on the same server, hosted by us, it will probably be slower than doing it on your laptop with  eg rapidsvn (which I now use, and the times I did, it seemed for me as fast as viewvc).

(2) Is it time to look at alternatives to sourceforge? I hate the thought of
going through all the disruption again, but if it is possible that things
might get worse, is now the time to look? (but please don't change to a
different source control system as well!)

:-)
We don't use sourceforge for much, but switching to something else means change to something else than svn:
http://www.svnhostingcomparison.com/
I don't want google personally (does not look nice for an OSS project in my view to host on google), I don't like berlios look and feel, so sourceforge it is.

Subversion hosting is not hot anymore, and going to a small player is not a good option. I already had a project disappear because the operator just stopped, most annoying.
My view is that we will switch to git somewhere in the future, but there is no hurry.

benny





[1] http://gramps.1791082.n4.nabble.com/Subversion-tp4657349p4657350.html
[2]
http://gramps.1791082.n4.nabble.com/txn-current-lock-Permission-denied-on-commit-tp4657325.html
[3]
http://gramps.1791082.n4.nabble.com/Please-bring-back-ViewVC-tp4657316p4657317.html





--
View this message in context: http://gramps.1791082.n4.nabble.com/old-SourceForge-repo-tp4657311p4657366.html
Sent from the GRAMPS - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Monitor your physical, virtual and cloud infrastructure from a single
web console. Get in-depth insight into apps, servers, databases, vmware,
SAP, cloud infrastructure, etc. Download 30-day Free Trial.
Pricing starts from $795 for 25 servers or applications!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/zoho_dev2dev_nov
_______________________________________________
Gramps-devel mailing list
Gramps-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-devel