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

Re: Auto-version corrections

From: Jim Amsden <jamsden@us.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 17:27:02 -0500
To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF666BFBFE.D0692365-ON852569F3.007A4B58@raleigh.ibm.com>
> You could also consider removing the first item. A core versioning 
> that supports the checkout option should still support locking 

Says who? That is a silly statement. Subversion isn't going to support
locking semantics at all. You'll get a 405 if you send a LOCK or UNLOCK.
Versioning servers don't need locking semantics -- they allow multiple
people to work on resources simultaneously. Think, "parallel development".
That is the antithesis of locks.
Maybe I wasn't clear enough. A core versioning server that *supports 
locking AND* the checkout option should continue to support its locking 
semantics. I didn't mean to imply that a server that didn't support 
locking but did support the checkout option needed to support locking. 
Note that locking is still optional even  though its referenced in core 
since its optional in 2518. So I still think the first item could be 
Received on Wednesday, 14 February 2001 17:27:16 UTC

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