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

Labelling support optional

From: Lisa Dusseault <lisa@xythos.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2000 08:57:22 -0800
To: "James J. Hunt \(by way of \"Ralph R. Swick\" <swick@w3.org>\)" <jjh@ira.uka.de>, <ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: "James J. Hunt" <jjh@ira.uka.de>
> To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
> Labels in DeltaV
> ================
> One of the recent changes in DeltaV was to remove labels from the core
> versioning part and put them into the options part of the protocol.
> We strongly suggest to undo this change.  Even if there exist two or
> three revision control systems that do not use labels, labels are
> essential for identifying sets of associated files in a repository of
> versions.  And, actually, they are really easy to implement
> (especially on top of a WebDAV implementation that requires built-in
> mechanisms for property storage).

Your assumption here is that there ARE associated files in a repository of
versions.  Why need there be?  There are repositories of documents -- like
mine at http://www.sharemation.com/~milele/public -- which have versions but
aren't associated with each other.

Are you implementing a revision control system for source code?  That could
be the disconnect between us.  When repositories are not intended for source
control, but just for ordinary documents, they require far fewer features.

If LABEL was a simple property, I wouldn't care, but since it's a complex
property plus a new method to modify the set of labels, I'd rather it be

Let me put it this way.  What would you like to accomplish that can't be
accomplished if labeling is in the optional part of the protocol?

Received on Friday, 1 December 2000 11:55:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:55:46 UTC