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

RE: Clarification on definition of a configuration....

From: Clemm, Geoff <gclemm@rational.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 10:59:41 -0400
Message-ID: <3906C56A7BD1F54593344C05BD1374B104652622@SUS-MA1IT01>
To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org

   From: Peter Raymond [mailto:Peter.Raymond@merant.com]

   It was the text in section 12 where it says "... that are not
   members of another configuration" that leads to the confusion.
   Lets imagine you have the structure in the e-mail below and you put
   the build collection under baseline control by issuing a
   BASELINE-CONTROL request.  Can you now issue another
   BASELINE-CONTROL request on build/src?  I guess not since the
   resulting configuration would contain members of the configuration
   defined by the initial BASELINE-CONTROL request.  Also the
   pre-condition (DAV:version-controlled-configuration-must-not-exist)
   would be triggered because build/src already has a
   version-controlled configuration property.

Yes, that is correct.

   BUT...I guess you could
   have done that in the reverse order...eg...  If I issue a
   BASELINE-CONTROL method on build/src first I would then be able to
   later put the build collection itself under BASELINE-CONTROL.  Is
   that right?

Yes.  You could also take  a collection that was under baseline
control and MOVE it under another configuration (it would not 
become part of that other configuration, but just would be located
under it from a namespace perspective).

   Would the second baseline contain members from build
   and build/include but no members from build/src? Because the second
   configuration can not contain members from the first configuration?

Yes, also correct.

Cheers,
Geoff
Received on Thursday, 27 September 2001 11:00:33 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 13:57:42 GMT