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

RE: error condition for delete of VHR when VCR is in checked-in c ollection

From: Clemm, Geoff <gclemm@rational.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2002 18:26:44 -0400
Message-ID: <3906C56A7BD1F54593344C05BD1374B103F8B329@SUS-MA1IT01>
To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org

   From: Julian Reschke [mailto:julian.reschke@greenbytes.de]

   > From: Clemm, Geoff
   > If you've deleted the version history, you have effectively
   > trashed any historical references (e.g. in collection versions)
   > to that version history.

   Nope. I have deleted the binding to the version history, not
   necessarily the information itself. In particular, my server may be
   able to reconstruct it upon UNCHECKOUT of the versioned collection
   "/a" (using the same URI).

I'm not sure how an UNCHECKOUT of a VCCl is related to this thread,
since an UNCHECKOUT request has no effect on a version history
resource.  But in any case, postcondition DAV:delete-version-set in
Section 5.6 states that deleting a version history resource deletes
all versions in that version history.  So your server would not be
able to reconstruct the version history once it was deleted.  Note
clarifies that deleting a member of a working collection just removes
a binding to a VHR, but doesn't delete the VHR.

   > If you are going to let that deletion
   > happen even when there is a VCR for that version history in
   > some workspace, I don't see that it makes any sense to worry
   > about whether or not the collection containing that VCR is
   > checked in or checked out.

   The issue is that RFC3253 doesn't define a method to switch off
   version control on a resource, and therefore people are using
   deletion on VHRs to switch off versioning (I couldn't find any
   mention of this in the spec, though).

I don't recall hearing of this approach, and don't see how it could be
compatible with the spec, giving the DAV:delete-version-set

   This conflates to separate things, but there doesn't seem to be
   better way to do it (please don't say COPY/DELETE/MOVE, because
   this creates a *new* resource).

COPY/DELETE/MOVE is the only interoperable way of removing something
from version control.  If you need a mechanism that doesn't create a
new resource, I'd suggest something like allowing a PROPPATCH to
remove the DAV:version-history property of the VCR, rather than trying
anything related to VHR deletion.

Received on Monday, 8 July 2002 18:27:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:55:48 UTC