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 1EdbkU-00069e-Oq
	for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 19 Nov 2005 23:03:59 +0000
Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id jAJN2p9h020041;
	Sat, 19 Nov 2005 23:02:51 GMT
Received: from wproxy.gmail.com (wproxy.gmail.com [64.233.184.202])
	by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id jAJMxlkx015222
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Sat, 19 Nov 2005 22:59:47 GMT
Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 68so252903wri
        for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Sat, 19 Nov 2005 14:59:47 -0800 (PST)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
        s=beta; d=gmail.com;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
        b=J5KBUb+8FfqnGnX9H2HX5YXl/C/ioDdj71VocZYDOBQHF6lINiZsOzJO5JM4TeW+Ax4Xycp14xXSbXAg2/g3AAdYvHSdZvW1xeUmtBerSdwOg8WPvaujNlIOFZcFOchIVDczIvVIlTCsVWlDX8HAZNocxkjfv5jJ4Oc7SJGD2w8=
Received: by 10.54.93.10 with SMTP id q10mr398092wrb;
        Sat, 19 Nov 2005 14:59:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.54.110.15 with HTTP; Sat, 19 Nov 2005 14:59:46 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <46059ce10511191459i1f5df5b4q8fcbd9ae2ad2b401@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 17:59:46 -0500
From: Dan Meltzer <parallelgrapefruit@gmail.com>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] implementation details for GLEP 41
In-Reply-To: <20051119225650.GE12982@mail.lieber.org>
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <20051119170615.GW12982@mail.lieber.org>
	 <20051119224241.GC12982@mail.lieber.org>
	 <46059ce10511191444u26638588qbba94f158c19327e@mail.gmail.com>
	 <20051119225650.GE12982@mail.lieber.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from base64 to 8bit by robin.gentoo.org id jAJMxlkx015222
X-Archives-Salt: 372e5c7e-2623-459f-9f43-0b58e627b11a
X-Archives-Hash: 820be1122f3fb9f416c86205ce1322e9

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?

On 11/19/05, Kurt Lieber <klieber@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 19, 2005 at 05:44:41PM -0500 or thereabouts, Dan Meltzer wrote:
> > Funy, I was just pondering that myself...  is authenticated rsync
> > really possible?
>
> Yes, it has its own auth mechanism.  We actually use it for some automated
> cron jobs that we have.
>
> > The only downside to this that I can see would be the lack of
> > history... FEX an upgraded -rX ebuild breaks something, I could test
> > against previous -rX's in turn to find out exactly which broke it, and
> > other history like stuff.  This may or may not be necessary/helpful,
> > hard to say without it having happened :)
>
> So, can other arch testers please pitch in with their $.02?  If we gave you
> rsync instead of CVS, would that be sufficient?  Or do you need the
> revision history, etc. of CVS?
>
> And, any objections to a ~30 minute delay between CVS<->this solution?
>
> --kurt
>
>
>

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list