xml-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dirk-Willem van Gulik <di...@webweaving.org>
Subject CVS and Subversion
Date Fri, 11 Jun 2004 10:17:27 GMT
In reaction to some worried emails related to some projects moving from 
CVS to Subversion.

->	Do not panic.

->	There is no ASF driven push (yet) for this move, no deadlines, no 
forcing.

->	It is you, the developers yourself, in each project who decide for 
-yourself-
	when and if it is time to go to Subversion - just let infrastructure 
know
	and they'll help you with the transition.

->	But I urge you to give it a look - it is a darn cool piece of 
technology; and
	it integrates very nicely with other tools.

And although it is true that Subversion is young and has a serious 
footprint - it does have
one important feature for projects like the ASF:  it no longer  
requires user accounts in order
to do commits. So in theory it is easier to secure a box and guard  
against changes under the
hood; i.e. done to the repository directly. And thus tamper with our  
record of history - as right
now developers -must- have r/w access to disk with the repository 
itself on the CVS machine.
With about a thousand committers using several thousands of machines 
back home and a
ssh/password based access controls it is a given that things leak over 
time. And one leak is
quite enough.

Thus reducing history/repository access alone is something the ASF as 
the legal steward
of the code cares about a lot. (Those who where around a few years back 
during the last
compromise of the  CVS  machine may recall the countless hours of work 
when we had to
pour over the CVS  records and backups to certify each and every file). 
It also means that
subversion is easier to sandbox - thus further minimizing the damage 
from 'real' exploits.

So all in all - it is a step  forward; but yes a relatively young step 
- and that is why we are
not yet making this an ASF wide compulsory change.

Secondly Ben Laurie/infrastructure is working on a ASF wide Certificate 
Authority in the
Bunker.co.uk using a machine specially donated by Ironsystems.com/Cliff 
Skolnick. Once
that is in place we've added an other much needed layer which allows us 
to continue to
scale in numbers of developers without suddenly needing a dozen full 
time sysadmins :)
and it allows us to decrease the sensitive information, like password 
files, which need
to be managed on a daily basis by multiple people on the machines even 
more.

And ultimately it means that it becomes more and more possible to rely 
less on a
'unix root' admin - and means that we can handle the mutations from the 
then several
thousands of commtiters on a timely basis.

So in sort - and to stress: there are no deadlines, pushing or sticks 
to get projects
to move from CVS to Subversion. Just the above carrots. But unless the 
early projects
hit some major snags with subversion - DO expect the ASF to move there 
in the next
two or three years - to allow us to continue to scale the 
infrastructure along with the
number of developers and their demands while being good stewards to our 
  code
heritage at the same time

On a positive note; do look at subversion; play with it - and note that 
its modern
infrastructure and standard based protocols do allow for levels of 
integration
previously hard to attain.

Thanks,

Dw,
-- 
Dirk-Willem van Gulik, President of the Apache Software Foundation.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xml.apache.org


Mime
View raw message