Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Non-local filesystem support (Was Issue 158 missing) #158

Open
pauljherring opened this issue May 27, 2016 · 4 comments
Open

Non-local filesystem support (Was Issue 158 missing) #158

pauljherring opened this issue May 27, 2016 · 4 comments

Comments

@pauljherring
Copy link

pauljherring commented May 27, 2016

The link mentioned here doesn't work no longer leads to the information it purports to: http://wiki.rabbitvcs.org/wiki/support/known-issues#no-support-for-mounted-locations

RabbitVCS currently does not support mounted locations, e.g. when you access a directory over SFTP, SMB, FTP or some other protocol with a custom URI scheme. For more information see Issue #158.

searching for sftp here doesn't return anything either.

Anything happening with including the functionality?

@pauljherring
Copy link
Author

Hah! Link now works.

Linking to here...

@pauljherring pauljherring changed the title Issue 158 missing Non-local filesystem support (Was Issue 158 missing) May 27, 2016
@nachazo
Copy link

nachazo commented Jan 26, 2017

Any update about this issue? :)
I'm really interested on.

@krautsource
Copy link

There is a workaround at least for SMB/CIFS (probably others too), I'll describe it here for reference.
If you are able to mount the network share to a local directory using the 'mount' command, then you can simply browse to this directory in your file manager and use RabbitVCS from there.
Be aware though that depending on network latency, using a subversion working copy over a network share ist slow. It should work okay on a LAN, but an internet connection with a round-trip time of 20-30 ms or more is a completely different story.
This approach should also work with sshfs (as a replacement for SFTP) and NFS, for example. Basically every protocol that allows you to mount a remote resource into your directory tree.

@lofidevops
Copy link

Thanks for the tips @krautsource - using a regular mountpoint rather than a custom URI scheme sounds like a sensible approach, using the right tool for the job.

@pauljherring I'm not on the development team, but I'd suggest maybe updating the wiki and closing this issue as resolved?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants