VisualSVN Server 通常被视为值得信赖的 SVN 服务器吗？
VisualSVN Server 通常被视为值得信赖的 SVN 服务器吗？
is VisualSVN Server generally viewed as a trustworthy SVN server?
如果你对这篇内容有疑问，欢迎到本站社区发帖提问 参与讨论，获取更多帮助，或者扫码二维码加入 Web 技术交流群。
绑定邮箱获取回复消息
由于您还没有绑定你的真实邮箱，如果其他用户或者作者回复了您的评论，将不能在第一时间通知您！
发布评论
评论（6）
我公司一直在用。 据我所知，它只是 SVN + Apache 的自定义发行版，并集成到安装程序中，因此它的“可信度”将与 Apache 和 subversion 相同。
My company has been using it. As far as I can tell, it's just a custom distribution of SVN + Apache rolled into an installer, so its "trustworthiness" will be the same as Apache's and subversion's.
我已经使用 VisualSVN Server 以及 Visual Studio 的 VisualSVN 客户端几个星期了。 它没有出现任何问题，而且安装起来比从木头上掉下来更容易。 管理控制台允许您创建存储库和文件夹，对其执行简单的操作（删除、导入等）并设置用户权限（Active Directory 集成或 SVN 身份验证）。 它只是起作用，并且只做足够的事情，仅此而已。 我认为他们完全正确。
我是一个 Windows Server 人员，所以我对使用 Apache 有点怀疑，但它是完全透明的，并且集成到 VisualSVN 中，如果他们没有在网站上提到它，我永远不会知道我正在运行 Apache。 如果您也想在 Apache 中托管其他内容，那么我想您会想要以不同的方式做事，但我想要一个交钥匙解决方案，而 VisualSVN 提供了它。
I've been using VisualSVN Server for a few weeks along with the VisualSVN client for Visual Studio. It has been trouble free and setting it up was easier than falling off a log. The management console lets you create repositories and folders, perform simple operations on them (delete, import, etc) and set user permissions (Active Directory Integrated or SVN authentication). It just works and does just enough and no more. I think they got it exactly right.
I'm a Windows Server guy so I was a bit dubious about using Apache, but it is completely transparent and integrated into VisualSVN, if they hadn't mentioned it on the web site, I'd never have known I was running Apache. If you wanted to host other things in Apache too, then I guess you'd want to do things differently, but I wanted a turnkey solution and VisualSVN provided it.
我有一个大问题。
我遇到的问题是，当存储库采用文件系统格式时，存储库以 Windows 行结尾（回车+换行）而不是 Linux 行结尾（换行）保存。
这阻止了我将存储库（所有修订均完好无损）从本地网络 Windows 服务器 VisualSVN 托管移植到公共 Linux SVN 托管。 由于我的所有代码都是 Windows 代码，如果我将 Windows 行结尾更改为 Linux 代码，我的所有代码都会混乱。 如果我不转换它们，Linux 中的 SVN 管理工具将无法识别存储库。
因此，我可以将代码导出到公共存储库中，但我丢失了所有以前的修订历史记录，这是一个巨大的不便，但不是一个问题。
I've had one big issue with it.
The issue I have is that the repositories are saved with Windows line endings (Carriage Return + Line Feed) instead of the Linux line endings (Line Feed) when the repositories are in the file system format.
This has prevented me from porting the repository (with all revisions in tact) from a local network Windows server VisualSVN hosting to a public Linux SVN hosting. Since all my code is in Windows code if I change the Windows line endings to the Linux ones I mess up all my code. SVN admin tools in Linux won't recognize the repository if I don't convert them though.
So I can move an export of the code into a public repository, but I lose all the previous revision history which is a huge inconvenience but not a show-stopper.
你能定义“值得信赖”吗？ 您的意思是不太可能崩溃或损坏数据，或者您的意思是能够处理大量流量，或者您的意思是不易被利用或被利用？
SVN + Apache 在每个类别中都表现良好，但我不知道安装程序的自定义部分包含哪些内容。
Can you define Trustworthy? Do you mean not likely to crash or corrupt data, or do you mean able to handle a lot of traffic, or do you mean not exploited or exploitable easily?
SVN + Apache fare well in each of those categories, but I don't know what the custom portion of the installer has in it.
我们已经使用它一段时间了，没有任何问题； 除了 GUI 之外，它与其他服务器具有相同的 Apache/SVN 基础。 很高兴能够使用 MSI 升级它，并且它有一个很好的 Windows GUI，用于处理 AD 集成、证书管理等。他们似乎也可以很快地获取更新。 唯一的两个缺点（当然是我上次检查时）是：
We've been using it for a while without any issues; apart from the GUIs it's the same Apache/SVN base as every other server. It's nice being able to upgrade it with an MSI, and it has a nice Windows GUI for handling AD integration, certificate management etc. They also seem to be pretty quick at getting updates out. The only two negatives (certainly when I last checked) are:
我已经使用它几年了，没有任何问题，它重量轻且高效。 但在 Windows 下高度集成（这对我来说根本不是问题）
作为替代方案，Collabnet Subversion Edge 看起来是一个不错的产品，但我没有尝试过。
I've used it since a few years without any issue, it is leightweight and efficient. But heavily integrated under windows (which is not at all a problem for me)
As an alternative, Collabnet Subversion Edge looks like to be a good product but I didn't tried it.