W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org > April to June 2001

RE: Confusion: Removing a resource from version control

From: Lisa Dusseault <lisa@xythos.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 12:46:30 -0700
To: "Kevin Angus" <kangus@acats.com>, <ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org>
Message-ID: <HPELJFCBPHIPBEJDHKGKGEKPCGAA.lisa@xythos.com>
I'm not dissing the RDBMS-model or any other model that says "keep around
versions that are referenced". In fact, what I'm proposing may be compatible
with that model -- we weren't planning to delete versions that were still
referenced by an existing VCR.

I'm also not dissing the model that says "keep around all versions forever".
That's fine.

But there is also a model that requires servers to delete stuff.  To
conserve space, to enforce policy on not archiving stuff (e.g. like email
servers), or for whatever reason.  The rule might be to delete ANYTHING over
2 yrs old.  The rule might be to cleanse (bitmask wipe) anything that's
deleted in case your archives are requested for material in a trial.  The
spec needs to accomodate these models as well.

Or consider the model on www.sharemation.com, where we support versioning
through a Web UI (try it out) but we also have quota.  A user is limited to
20 MB.  THey reach that and clean out old files.  How can they possibly
reduce the amount of space used in their system?  Remember, this person may
be using current Web Folders or other existing clients.

To rebut the earlier argument that clients need predictable behaviour --
well sometimes that goes by the wayside.  After all, that's what 404 Not
Found was invented for.  Things disappear.

lisa


> -----Original Message-----
> From: ietf-dav-versioning-request@w3.org
> [mailto:ietf-dav-versioning-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Kevin Angus
> Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2001 12:03 PM
> To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Confusion: Removing a resource from version control
>
>
> If you were to use the model of an RDBMS;
>
> If a version is related to anything then you must archive
> everything at that
> point of time before removing the relation and the version.
>
> If something in the version control system depends on or is a child of the
> version that is to be deleted then that version can not be deleted.
>
> Do not allow the versioning standard to allow defined corruption...
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ietf-dav-versioning-request@w3.org
> [mailto:ietf-dav-versioning-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Lisa Dusseault
> Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2001 12:37 PM
> To: Clemm, Geoff; ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Confusion: Removing a resource from version control
>
>
>
> > If the defined behavior is to keep all versions, then the other
> > behavior can be achieved by the client explicitly deleting
> > the versions when deleting the version-controlled resource.
> > But if the defined behavior is to delete all versions, the other
> > behavior cannot be achieved by any explicit client action
> > (the versions are deleted and cannot be brought back).
>
> Normally I'd agree with what you're saying, but cleaning up old
> versions can
> be server policy.  Server administrators can't force clients to
> do that, so
> it must be a possible server behaviour.
>
> I understand it can also be server policy to keep around all old versions
> and NEVER delete them.  That's why DeltaV MUST support both.
>
> lisa
>
Received on Wednesday, 13 June 2001 15:48:13 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 13:57:41 GMT