incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "C. Michael Pilato" <cmpil...@collab.net>
Subject Re: [PROPOSAL][VOTE] Subversion
Date Wed, 11 Nov 2009 15:00:35 GMT
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 12:38 PM, Igor Burilo <igor.burilo@polarion.org> wrote:
>> isn’t guaranteed (you and Michael Pilato are sceptic regarding Serf). Nobody
> 
> Hang on - let's be clear here: ra_serf passes *all* of the Subversion
> regression tests just fine and has done so for several years now.  (An
> ra_serf slave is part of the standard buildbot runs.)
> 
> ra_serf doesn't work with certain HTTP/1.0 proxies (because they don't
> support chunked request bodies) and C-Mike has always been
> uncomfortable with how ra_serf views editor drives.
> 
> It's not like ra_serf isn't functional or feature equivalent; in
> several areas, ra_serf is much much faster than ra_neon.  And, I've
> used ra_serf every day since I initially wrote it.  =)  -- justin

Yeah, the label of "skeptic" really doesn't fit me on this matter.  I am
100% confident that ra_serf is the right place to invest our collective
DAV-aimed energy.  It is usable for most folks right now (and has been for a
long time).  It has bugs, but then what doesn't?  The only strong sticking
point for me is the editor drive item Justin mentions above.  That's not so
much a user-facing problem, but a develop/API-usage one.

-- 
C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato@collab.net>
CollabNet   <>   www.collab.net   <>   Distributed Development On Demand


Mime
View raw message