Topic: Subversion Question

[sabrewulf]

Hi all,

I'm looking at using subversion for our work projects and have a question in regards to the version on the sme repository.

The subversion revision is listed as 1.4.6.

The version on the subversion site is 1.6.2.

I guess this question is directed to Cactus, are there plans to bring the newer versions of subversion across or are there impediments that prevents this from happening.

Cheers.

[cactus]

I'm looking at using subversion for our work projects and have a question in regards to the version on the sme repository.

The subversion revision is listed as 1.4.6.

The version on the subversion site is 1.6.2.

I guess this question is directed to Cactus, are there plans to bring the newer versions of subversion across or are there impediments that prevents this from happening.

I am not planning on this as the smeserver-subversion RPM can work with any subversion RPM, it is only meant to tie in subversion with the SME Server architecture.

Subversion can and most likely is taken by default from the CentOS base repository (from which SME Server is derived, this repo is enabled by default in any SME Server). Due to CentOS release policy it will only support the latest 1.4 release in it's official repositories, which AFAIK is 1.4.6.

I see no use in me maintaining a RPM package (nor do I have the time for it) as their are other major trusted software repository providers doing so, latest in the DAG repository is 1.5.5 (see the wiki on how to configure the dag repository on your server: http://wiki.contribs.org/Dag) and AFAIK RPM's for later versions are supplied by the Subversion maintainers their selves (RHEL 4 versions should work on CentOS 4 and therefore on SME Server 7.x as well): http://subversion.tigris.org/getting.html#redhat

I am not sure if Subversion 1.6.x will run on SME Server 7.x as it seems not to be released on RHEL4.x architecture, possibly not supported I guess, have not verified why not.

[sabrewulf]

Thanks Cactus for the clarification.

I wasn't sure who was maintaining the subversion package and certainly didn't mean to imply that you specifically take it upon yourself (apologies if it sounded as if I did) as you have stated that dag has a later version that may do the job if the 1.6 versions are not being released.

I appreciate the effort you and the other maintainers put in to SME as I am sure everyone else on the forums does, many thanks.

Thanks again for the information and pointers, muchly appreciated.

Cheers.

[cactus]

Thanks Cactus for the clarification.

You are welcome.

I wasn't sure who was maintaining the subversion package and certainly didn't mean to imply that you specifically take it upon yourself (apologies if it sounded as if I did)

No, it did not. I just wanted to make things clear.

I appreciate the effort you and the other maintainers put in to SME as I am sure everyone else on the forums does, many thanks.

Thanks again for the information and pointers, muchly appreciated.

Once again, thanks and you are welcome. It is nice to hear people are happy with it.

[sabrewulf]

After a fair bit of reading and looking about, I've decided that a Document Management System (DMS) will suit what we are trying to do a bit more easier than subversion, mainly because the design staff here generate lots of binary files and are not concerned so much with actual versioning, mainly storage and access privileging.

So now that I feel like I've wasted your time, I've installed Java JDK and am looking at OpenKM http://www.openkm.com which may do what we want.

If people are interested I'm happy to write up a little how-to of what I did.

Cheers.

[cactus]

So now that I feel like I've wasted your time, I've installed Java JDK and am looking at OpenKM http://www.openkm.com which may do what we want.

Don't, the information supplied might as well be valuable to others...