W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org > April to June 2002

RE: Problems with Windows XP "redirector" and Mac OS X WebDAVFS.

From: Clemm, Geoff <gclemm@rational.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2002 08:49:02 -0400
Message-ID: <3906C56A7BD1F54593344C05BD1374B106979C63@SUS-MA1IT01>
To: "'ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org'" <ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org>
One workaround that comes to mind is to interpret a MOVE from a
non-version-controlled resource to a checked-out VCR as a COPY/DELETE.

Unless someone comes up with a better idea, I'll add this to the 3253
"errata" sheet as an interoperability suggestion for the MOVE request.

Cheers,
Geoff


   From: Kasia Jonca [mailto:Kasia.Jonca@merant.com]

   We've been testing Merant versioning WebDAV server with Windows XP
   "redirector" and Mac OS X WebDAVFS. The behavior of our versioning
   WebDAV server is equivalent to the behavior of the DeltaV server
   with auto versioning.  On the surface things seems to be working
   but if you look closer the situation is really bad. Both clients
   behave like a file system and perform what is called a "safe
   save". This means that the new changes are saved in a temporary
   file on the WebDAV server, the old file is deleted and then the
   temp file is renamed. This means that when a file is being saved we
   lose the previous versions, a new version history is created. Both
   clients also create a few versions that seem to contain some
   temporary values making the version history unacceptably polluted.
   We are quite concerned since both Windows XP "redirector" and Mac
   OS WebDAVFS would enable access to WebDAV server from any
   application on those platforms. With this behavior the only
   solution for us or a DeltaV server would be to deny the write
   access to these agents so that the user data is not destroyed and
   polluted. This is quite a change from our expectations on what
   DeltaV would do for us and we are hoping that some solutions can be
   still found.  Did anybody test these clients with a DeltaV server
   implementation? Any comments, suggestions, explanations?
Received on Wednesday, 24 April 2002 08:49:40 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 13:57:43 GMT