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

RE: COPY, MOVE and VCR's

From: Peter Raymond <Peter.Raymond@merant.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 14:33:14 -0000
Message-ID: <20CF1CE11441D411919C0008C7C5A13B03BF635B@stalmail.eu.merant.com>
To: "Kirmse, Daniel" <daniel.kirmse@sap.com>, "Ietf-Dav-Versioning (E-mail)" <ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org>
Hi,

In my opinion yes, it makes sense to create a new VCR pointing to the
existing history if possible.

Some server implementers may not want to copy version-controlled resources,
eg the result of
the copy would be a new non-version-controlled resource.  I think this is
why the specification is
vague about the results of copying a VCR.  Also note that in WebDAV (RFC2518
section 8.8.2) 
the copying of the resources live properties is optional (eg some servers
may not copy the live 
properties).

Regards,
-- 
Peter Raymond - MERANT 
Principal Architect (PVCS) 
Tel: +44 (0)1727 813362 
Fax: +44 (0)1727 869804 
mailto:Peter.Raymond@merant.com 
WWW: http://www.merant.com 
-----Original Message-----
From: Kirmse, Daniel [mailto:daniel.kirmse@sap.com]
Sent: 24 January 2002 14:20
To: Ietf-Dav-Versioning (E-mail)
Subject: RE: COPY, MOVE and VCR's


So my first assumption was right - except for workspaces
Thanks for clarification
Daniel
-----Original Message-----
From: Peter Raymond [mailto:Peter.Raymond@merant.com]
Sent: Donnerstag, 24. Januar 2002 15:12
To: Kirmse, Daniel; Ietf-Dav-Versioning (E-mail)
Subject: RE: COPY, MOVE and VCR's


Hi, 
[Daniel said:] 
>For COPY I'd expect to got a new VCR at the destination with an exact copy 
>of properties. This implies that the new created VCR must share the 
>version-history with the source VCR. Is this correct? Is this desirable? 
I think this is desirable and correct but with one caveat... 
Both in section 1.3 (where the workspace term is defined) and in section 6 
the DeltaV specification says that you can only have one VCR for a given 
version history in a workspace.  If copy created a new VCR but pointed to 
the original VHR then this rule could be violated if the destination is in 
the same workspace as the source of the copy. 
If the copy does not break this rule then it would be fine to have two VCRs 
pointing to the same version history. 
I certainly wouldn't have thought that moving a VCR would create a new 
history resource. 
  
Regards, 
-- 
Peter Raymond - MERANT 
Principal Architect (PVCS) 
Tel: +44 (0)1727 813362 
Fax: +44 (0)1727 869804 
mailto:Peter.Raymond@merant.com 
WWW: http://www.merant.com 



-----Original Message----- 
From: Kirmse, Daniel [mailto:daniel.kirmse@sap.com] 
Sent: 24 January 2002 13:56 
To: Ietf-Dav-Versioning (E-mail) 
Subject: COPY, MOVE and VCR's 


Hi, 
I wonder what happens when I copy or move a VCR? 
Defining this behavior as not expected by the user, I'd say COPY means 
creation of a new version-history and copy of the checked-in version to that

new VH. With that the checked-in property of the copied VCR must change. 
Same for MOVE except for the deletion of the source. 
Regards, 
Daniel 
Received on Thursday, 24 January 2002 09:36:50 GMT

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