On 16.12.2019 16:20, Julian Foad wrote: > Last December I observed within a blog post [1], > > " > On Docker Hub [2] the most comprehensive svn server seems to be > elleflorio/svn-server (http + svnserve). Next is garethflowers/svn- > server (very simple; svnserve only). None seem to be an enterprise- > grade installation. > > There are no 'subversion' or 'svn' packages in the SNAP store [3]. > " > > The packages we list on http://subversion.apache.org/packages > are all "traditional" desktop/server operating system packages. For > svn server deployments, I feel we are missing some options that admins > would prefer nowadays. > > Does anyone here have a good feel for what would be the most widely > useful distribution formats nowadays? Let's say we're talking about > an admin installing a Subversion server for the first time, at a small > to medium sized software development department. > > - Docker?
As much as I love to hate the idea that one should deploy a whole OS image in order to run one server app ... Docker is still the best option given our "no binary packages" policy. Since a Dockerfile (or a docker-compose.yaml file) is source. > - VM image / appliance? > - Snap / AppImage / FlatPak? > - ... Far too complex and/or distro-specific, IMO. > I want to get a feel for whether we, the Subversion community [4], > would do well to publish one or more such option. > > Currently I just have a gut feeling that we should. We should look into how, or if, other ASF projects publish their Dockerfiles. I'd much rather have an asf/ repository at docker.io than a subversion/ repository. -- Brane
