On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 10:08 AM, Zé <jose.pas...@gmx.com> wrote:
> On 08/27/2014 03:53 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
>>
>> It's not that you can't use it, just that it can't protect you from
>> the things that can happen through direct file system access. Like
>> accidentally deleting the whole repo or changing ownership or
>> permissions.
>
>
> I don't see your point. There's also a likelihood that those accidents can
> happen on a remote server.
Accidents can happen anywhere, but having files that are not writable
by ordinary users greatly reduces the possibility and having them on a
separate machine where only experienced administrators log in at shell
level even more so.
> But regarding my question, if file:// is not intended to be used, as you and
> Stefan Sperling argued, then what are the available options for those who
> need a version control system and can't set up a server? Is it even
> possible to deploy subversion in that scenario?
There is nothing specific about subversion that is a problem with
file:// access. It is just the nature of having direct write access
to anything that makes it a fragile situation. With svn:// or http://
access there is nothing a client can do to delete data or change
access for anyone else. With file access it is as easy as typing 'rm
-rf in the wrong place since you have to have write access to use it
at all.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikes...@gmail.com
