Our needs are changing though, and our team is clearly outgrowing the feature set that SourceSafe provides. From directory-level branching to better binary file compression and storage to concurrent editing, Subversion clearly fulfills our needs...and it's free to boot. I keep my personal files in a Subversion repository at home, so I'm familiar with it when working on one machine. However, now I need to set it up for a couple of our departments (we got some non-IT departments into version control!) and I'm trying to figure out the best way to do it. The requirements are fairly straightforward:

• All access will be internal. In fact, no public access will be granted to anybody. However, not all users will have an account on the repository's server.
• Must be able to fully migrate the existing VSS repository to Subversion.
• Must be able to support roughly 15-20 users concurrently accessing the repository. There may be more user than that overall, but that's the targeted number of actual concurrent use.
• Must be able to lock down certain projects such that users must authenticate themselves when trying to access the files.

OK, now that the requirements have been stated, I need your help figuring out the best approach.

First and foremost, where to physically put the repository. We have a shiny new development box (running Red Hat Linux 4.0) for our team with tons and tons of free space. I was thinking about creating a partition there dedicated to housing the repository. At the same time, I'm hesitant to put the repository on the same box as where most of the development is going to be taking place (we all have our own JRun/ColdFusion instances on this box, so we're separate, but sharing the same overall resources). I just don't trust all the banging that the box will be taking to house our core file repository, even though we'll be taking proper backups on a nightly basis. Should I phsyically separate the repository from the dev box?

With regard to the network protocol, from my research, it seems like the best setup is to install Apache on the server and manage the file access and user autentication using the mod_dav_svn module. However, this feels like overkill to an extent. I have the excellent book Pragmatic Version Control using Subversion 2nd Ed. by Mike Mason (and published by Dave Thomas and Andy Hunt of Pragmatic Programmer fame), so I'm aware of the pros and cons of each of the protocol options (svnsserve, svnserve+ssh, and Apache). However, I'm looking for other real-world opinions on each, based on the stated requirements.

With regard to migrating the existing VSS repository, this is a biggie. The problem I have with a lot of the current presentations about using Subversion is that they all assume that you're starting with a clean slate. However, we have literally years worth of comments, tags, labels, etc., that are an absolute "must keep." To that end, I have been monitoring the open source project Vss2Svn with the hopes of using their solution for migrating our repository. However, it doesn't look quite ready for prime time just yet. Has anybody succesfully used it by chance? I also found a solution from Polarion called Subversion Pro that looks to be free for at least the migration aspects of the product. Has anybody used this one?

Lastly, are there any tips on the best way to set up authorization/authentication? Anything else I'm overlooking? We're currently using the amazing FogBugz project management system from Fog Creek software (it integrates with virtually all source code management systems, which is great), so we don't need things like Trac.

Thanks for any insights.

He's not aiming for it to supplant the gi-normous job boards like Monster or HotJobs. Rather, his goal is to keep it as a niche site where you can get the real job details for a given position without any hassle. Unique features include:

• For candidates, the site is entirely free, including not having to register for anything.
• Listings expire after 3 weeks. As he notes, most candidates don't apply for jobs that have been posted for longer than that.
• All job posts must disclose the company at which the position is located. No "Company Confidential" listings are allowed. Since there are no recruiters involved, you can do all the research you want for a position without being hassled.
• For a small $350 fee, an employer can post listings on the site. In comparison to the 15%-20% of base salary that recruiting fees that many recruiters charge employers for placing a candidate, this is chump change.
• He offers his standard 90-day money back guarantee. If you don't find anybody to fill the position, hire the wrong candidate, if they quit just after starting, etc., you get your $350 back unquestioned. (Charities and non-profits can get in touch with their customer support reps about reduced fees.)
• The job posting form contains checkboxes for answering each of the 12 questions of the Joel Test, which is his measure of the quality of a software team. This is a non-marketing way to really gauge the type of team you might be joining.

Since this is an experiment on his part, you'll note that there is no search functionality or saved profiles or anything beyond the basic listings. (This might expand if the site proves to be successful.) However, from Google to Six Apart to BEA to MySQL, there are a number of big-name company jobs currently listed, along with a lot of other smaller companies who I have seen are doing some great work.

I'm not sure how the site will hold up, if only because recruiters will always find a way to post seemingly legitimate job listings, and there doesn't seem to be a screening process for who is posting the job. That being said, I love the idea of side-stepping recruiters with no tech background who are seemingly the gatekeepers to a lot of great jobs.

Here's Joel's official announcement.

Enjoy.

At the same time though, I wasn't happy with the look and feel. It was too "amateur" looking. Further, my hopes of getting a few of my friends to read my blog were incredibly surpassed and I'm currently just over 6,000 hits! Thanks!

Over the last couple of months, I've been envious of those who are using the Aura Web Page Exoskin. There's just something about it that's very clean and professional looking, particularly for blog layouts. I initially tried using the Aura Skin for BlogCFC provided by Joe Rinehart, but it's about a year old and there were some significant modifications made to the layout.cfm template in Ray's subsequent BlogCFC updates, so I abandoned that and just downloaded the CSS code from Leorex directly. It took me a several hours to get things laid out and conforming to the proper color palette (I still hate CSS, by the way), but what you're seeing now is the result of that work. You may need to clear your cache to make sure you get the latest CSS, but I think this is a better representation of how I want to live on the internet. There's a small issue with the comments window with the gray sliver down the left gutter, but it was 1:30 am and I really had to get to bed at that point.

Anyway, let me know what you think. In particular, let me know if something looks funky in your browser. (Admittedly, I only tested this against IE 6 and Firefox 1.5.0.1 on Windows along with getting a screenshot of what it would look like in Safari from Snugtech.com. But there's nothing complex about the CSS that should cause fits in modern browsers.)

They are currently having a sale on all MS Press titles (up to 46% off), and I thought that some of the MS software users/admins (i.e., SQL Server) might want to grab a resource. Even if you don't use MS software, they have almost every major book title you can imagine (including all of Ben's books). Further, they run massive discount promos like this for almost all publishers at some point, so this is not a one-time deal.

I know there are online services like Safari Bookshelf by O'Reilly, but I personally have some sort of mental block with large quantities of online reading. If I'm dabbling with something, these services are great. But if I'm serious about the subject, I need to have the book in my hand. Strange, but hey, that's me.