Subversion 1.6 with Trac 0.11.4
Paurush
I am in the process of upgrading Subversion 1.4.6 server to 1.6. We
also extensively use Trac (v 0.10.4) and I am hoping to upgrade that
as well to version 0.11.4.
Can anyone confirm that there are no known issues with Subversion 1.6
and Trac 0.11.4?
Thanks,
Paurush
Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven
>Can anyone confirm that there are no known issues with Subversion 1.6
>and Trac 0.11.4?
I have not tried it yet, so I cannot say.
The thing with 1.6 is that it provides a ctypes binding for Python, which
might be something we want to switch to as it will simplify a lot of the
interfacing which we now do via SWIG.
But if 1.6 is installed with SWIG bindings I do not foresee huge issues at
this point, but I need to test this.
--
Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven <asmodai(-at-)in-nomine.org> / asmodai
イェルーン ラウフロック ヴァン デル ウェルヴェン
http://www.in-nomine.org/ | http://www.rangaku.org/ | GPG: 2EAC625B
All conditioned things are impermanent. Work out your own salvation with
diligence...
Emmanuel Blot
>>and Trac 0.11.4?
With Trac, I can't say, but as usual with SVN (and most software
applications), it's better to wait a bit when a new major version is
released.
SVN 1.5 has suffered major issues till 1.5.4 - even 1.5.5 to handle
the merge information the right way (1.5.3 was simply unusable).
I gave a try two weeks ago with a SVN 1.6.0 client and a 1.5.5 server,
this experiment left a major mess in my test resository; as with SVN
1.5 early releases, the culprit is once again the merging feature. SVN
became mad, trying to add and merge files from already merged and
integrated branches.
So I can't tell about the server side yet, but on the client side, I'm
sure I'll wait for the next release(s?) before upgrading. YMMV
Cheers,
Manu.
Christian Boos
There was one issue with the blame feature, fixed now in 0.11-stable
(http://trac.edgewall.org/ticket/8179).
-- Christian
Paurush
contemplating moving to subversion 1.5.5 (and trac 0.11.4) rather than
jump to 1.6. I hope moving to svn 1.5 is not that risky!
Thanks, Paurush
Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven
>Thanks everyone for all your valuable comments. I am now seriously
>contemplating moving to subversion 1.5.5 (and trac 0.11.4) rather than
>jump to 1.6. I hope moving to svn 1.5 is not that risky!
Been running that for a while now, no issues.
--
Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven <asmodai(-at-)in-nomine.org> / asmodai
イェルーン ラウフロック ヴァン デル ウェルヴェン
http://www.in-nomine.org/ | http://www.rangaku.org/ | GPG: 2EAC625B
Be yourself is all that you can do.
Paurush
still be using Trac (v.10.4). Has anyone encountered any issues with
this setup?
Thanks,
Paurush
Does Trac v 0.10.4 has any
On Apr 5, 1:39 pm, Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven <asmo...@in-
nomine.org> wrote:
>
> >Thanks everyone for all your valuable comments. I am now seriously
> >contemplating moving to subversion 1.5.5 (and trac 0.11.4) rather than
> >jump to 1.6. I hope moving to svn 1.5 is not that risky!
>
> Been running that for a while now, no issues.
>
> --
> Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven <asmodai(-at-)in-nomine.org> / asmodai
Stodge
a test/development server and try the update there. Use a sandbox to
see if it works or not and if it does, then backup and upgrade your
main server.
Paurush
Trac 0.10.4 works great with Subversion 1.5.6 on Apache 2.0.63
Thanks, Paurush
On May 12, 10:41 am, Stodge <sto...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Why don't you just archive the subversion and trac data and move it to
> a test/development server and try the update there. Use a sandbox to
> see if it works or not and if it does, then backup and upgrade your
> main server.
>