From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1EdbuF-0007l0-5H for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 19 Nov 2005 23:14:03 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id jAJNBrjk029701; Sat, 19 Nov 2005 23:11:53 GMT Received: from jaguar.lieber.org (jaguar.lieber.org [217.160.252.168]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id jAJN7fxF000991 for ; Sat, 19 Nov 2005 23:07:41 GMT Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by jaguar.lieber.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E08929D745 for ; Sat, 19 Nov 2005 23:12:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from jaguar.lieber.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (jaguar.lieber.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 06967-15 for ; Sat, 19 Nov 2005 23:12:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: by jaguar.lieber.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 6346129D743; Sat, 19 Nov 2005 23:12:10 +0000 (UTC) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 23:12:10 +0000 From: Kurt Lieber To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] implementation details for GLEP 41 Message-ID: <20051119231210.GG12982@mail.lieber.org> References: <20051119170615.GW12982@mail.lieber.org> <20051119224241.GC12982@mail.lieber.org> <46059ce10511191444u26638588qbba94f158c19327e@mail.gmail.com> <20051119225650.GE12982@mail.lieber.org> <46059ce10511191459i1f5df5b4q8fcbd9ae2ad2b401@mail.gmail.com> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="lGQpFNrcSq0Rb43w" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <46059ce10511191459i1f5df5b4q8fcbd9ae2ad2b401@mail.gmail.com> X-GPG-Key: http://www.lieber.org/kurtl.pub.gpg User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at lieber.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.856 tagged_above=-999 required=5.5 tests=[ALL_TRUSTED=-3.3, AWL=-0.034, BAYES_00=-2.599, TW_SV=0.077] X-Spam-Score: -5.856 X-Spam-Level: X-Archives-Salt: c2cd380d-5592-4762-9fbb-4c625401f81f X-Archives-Hash: b26e87355cc5855fc240127a84c2c7e2 --lGQpFNrcSq0Rb43w Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline On Sat, Nov 19, 2005 at 05:59:46PM -0500 or thereabouts, Dan Meltzer wrote: > Sorry for two mails in a row.. but out of curiosity, instead of using > 30 minute rsync, why not 30 minute mirror of cvs? KDE does this fairly > well, they even have it something like every 5 minutes, is there any > reason mirrored cvs is not possible//feasible? is this something svn > has gotten better at? We have a well-established rsync infrastructure in place and rsync has its own authentication that will support per-user auth (something that we require) I'm not opposed to using cvs, but unless there's a strong need for it, I'd rather stick with rsync. (which is why I'm asking here to see what the need for it is) --kurt --lGQpFNrcSq0Rb43w Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDf7FKJPpRNiftIEYRAjjlAJ9+Nbf+KdgQrdOFttl/T76wU/G2fACfc9P4 ofMG3DjpOUzeaLrsURYPQPU= =xnRj -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --lGQpFNrcSq0Rb43w-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list