From: Eric Wong <normalperson@yhbt.net>
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 18:32:02 GMT
Subject: Re: git-svn on a strangely configured (pathwise) subversion repository
Message-ID: <20070212183202.GB21413@localdomain>
In-Reply-To: <200702121136.06382.blindglobe@gmail.com>

AJ Rossini <blindglobe@gmail.com> wrote:
> Greetings all -
> 
> (paths and names changed, but basically correct)
> 
> I'm trying to use git-svn as a svn client on a repository which is not
> quite configured in a standard way...  i.e. 

Perfectly standard on some corporate networks, unfortunately :(

> $ git svn fetch
> RA layer request failed: PROPFIND request failed on '/path/to': PROPFIND 
> of '/path/to': 403 Forbidden (https://dummy-host-name.com) 
> at /usr/bin/git-svn line 2861

<snip>

> The problem seems to be that the Repository Root directory is not
> readable, while the URL is (at least for me, using HTTPS).
> 
> This is using
> $ git --version
> git version 1.4.4.4

Known problem.  This is fixed in commit
747fa12cef73b6ca04fffaddaad7326cf546cdea

> Here is what I'm considering: 
> #1 - upgrading to the 1.5.0 RC series

Stop after #1 if you want a sure thing the current 1.5.0 RC series
contains fixes for repositories with only partial read permissions.

> #2 - trying Eric Wong's git-svn branch at
> http://git.bogomips.org/git-svn.git

Read access in your case *should* continue to work here.  More testing
would be good.  This branch may not work well if your write access is
not the same as as your read access; which is something I keep
forgetting to fix...

> #3 - getting a dump of the repository from the owner, loading it into
> a local svn server, and doing a local conversion...
> 
> With respect to #1/#2, I'm a bit cautious with upgrading to something
> not rock solid (let's just say that except for this, git 1.4.4.4 has
> been excellent for my needs...).
> 
> With respect to #3 - I'd prefer not to waste the admin's (personal)
> time if 

#3 is definitely not necessary.

Junio has done a wonderful job of keeping the 1.5.0-rc* series stable
and usable, so #1 is the safest.  I'll try to fix things today so #2
will work better.

-- 
Eric Wong