On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 01:56, Hyrum K. Wright <[email protected]> wrote: > [ This is going to come off rather biased, given my affiliations, so > I'd appreciate some additional comments. ] > > From http://www.collab.net/downloads/subversion/redhat.html, I noticed > that CollabNet only offers downloads of CollabNet Subversion Edge for > Centos and Suse, but not vanilla Subversion packages for those > platforms. I'd prefer if our packages page linked only to packages of > Subversion, not packages of Subversion+other stuff. Maybe that means > we reevaluate VisualSVN on that page as well. > > Thoughts? Bikesheds? >
1. What is the definition of "vanilla" Subversion package? For example WANDisco's distribution for Windows comes with Apache HTTPD and GPL-ed (!) TortoiseSVN. All package is 32MB size, while Subversion binaries are only 10% of package's size. It requires Microsoft .NET Framework 2.0 to be pre-installed. Is it considered to be a vanilla Subversion package or not? 2. Let's think about users: they have different needs for Subversion: just a client, client and server etc. There are different packages to get Subversion to be installed and running. Some comes with just a zip archive, others have some installation and configuration scripts. That's what customers looking for. 3. From my point of view, it is more important for users to explicitly mark packages that requires registration and email for download. -- Ivan Zhakov
