W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org > October to December 2000

Re: Atomic CHECKIN of all checkouts of an activity

From: <David.Goodenough@dga.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 12:18:44 +0000
To: Greg Stein <gstein@lyra.org>
cc: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
Message-ID: <8025699E.004378F1.00@mail.dga.co.uk>
This would go a long way to implementing the batch operation that I was
requesting (it seems like a long time ago) that got rejected.  I would
welcome this.

David Goodenough





Greg Stein <gstein@lyra.org> on 21-11-2000 12:17:29 AM

To:   ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
cc:    (bcc: David Goodenough/DGA/GB)
Subject:  Re: Atomic CHECKIN of all checkouts of an activity




Agreed. There doesn't seem to be any need for a new method.

Cheers,
-g

On Mon, Nov 20, 2000 at 11:27:38AM +0000, Tim_Ellison@uk.ibm.com wrote:
>
>
> CHECKIN to an activity.
>
> Tim Ellison
> Java Technology Centre, MP146
> IBM UK Laboratory, Hursley Park, Winchester, UK.
> tel: +44 (0)1962 819872  internal: 249872  MOBx: 270452
>
>
> "Geoffrey M. Clemm" <geoffrey.clemm@rational.com> on 2000-11-19 06:05:06
PM
>
> Please respond to "Geoffrey M. Clemm" <geoffrey.clemm@rational.com>
>
> To:   ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
> cc:
> Subject:  Atomic CHECKIN of all checkouts of an activity
>
>
>
>
>
> Greg has asked for the ability to tell the server that he wants
> all checkouts against an activity to be checked in atomically.
>
> A natural way to marshall this would be to allow CHECKIN to be
> applied to an activity (since activities cannot be versioned,
> this is unambiguous).  Or we could introduce a CHECKIN-ACTIVITY
> method.
>
> Any preferences (or objections)?
>
> Cheers,
> Geoff
>
>
>

--
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
Received on Tuesday, 21 November 2000 07:18:53 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 13:57:39 GMT