On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 7:22 AM, Stefan Sperling <s...@elego.de> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 07:06:08AM -0400, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: > > I note that there is no libserf or serf RPM published, anywhere, for > RHEL, > > and it's not yet enabled for Fedora. That makes the serf libraries a bit > > more awkward to integrate for testing. How much benefit is there in using > > serf rether than neon for subversion-1.7.x? I'm developing a sneaking > > suspicion that if anyone's going to bundle it for RHEL use, it's going to > > be me, and I don't know if it's worth the effort. > > For now, don't bother with serf on RHEL. Just use neon. > There are currently no considerable benefits. Rather, there are still > issues with serf that neon does not suffer (which is why serf isn't > the default yet). > > In some future release, using serf will result in more efficient checkouts > and updates, e.g. by avoiding repeated download of content already present > in .svn/pristine/ > Cool, thanks. Dealing with the "compile and use neon locally" requirements for RHEL 4 in some recent work were.... awkward, but backporting serf for multiple RHEL releases would be burdensome if there's not a very real benefit.
