W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org > January to March 2003

RE: Re (3): request for un-version-control feature

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@greenbytes.de>
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2003 22:37:30 +0100
To: <Edgar@edgarschwarz.de>, <ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org>
Message-ID: <JIEGINCHMLABHJBIGKBCEEGKGKAA.julian.reschke@greenbytes.de>

> From: ietf-dav-versioning-request@w3.org
> [mailto:ietf-dav-versioning-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of
> Edgar@edgarschwarz.de
> Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2003 9:45 PM
> To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
> Cc: Edgar@edgarschwarz.de
> Subject: Re (3): request for un-version-control feature
>
>
>
> "Julian Reschke" <julian.reschke@greenbytes.de> wrote:
> > "Clemm, Geoff" <gclemm@rational.com>
> > > OK, since there are three folks asking for UN-XXX-CONTROL,
> > > I'm willing to withdraw my objection since I'm the only one
> > > objecting.
> > >
> > > So now the main question is: should this go in the
> > > next revision of 3253, or should it be a separate draft?
> > > (Either one is OK with me).
> >
> > I think it would be best to collect all "common" extensions to
> DeltaV into a
> > separate draft. Once it's stable and depending on the timeline for
> > RFC3253bis,  we can decide either to move contents into RFC3253bis or to
> > publish it separately.
> Sounds fine to me. BTW, is there already an "common" extensions draft ?

No, not yet.

> Then there would be a search for volunteers to do a draft for
UNVERSION-CONTROL
> and UNBASELINE-CONTROL.
> Lisa, Julian, others or should I give it a try ? I couldn't
> promise to do it the next
> couple of days but it's not that urgent I guess.

That would be great. Let me know if I can assist with rfc RFC2629 machinery
(RFC in XML), if you happen to prefer that to Word or plain text.

Julian

--
<green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760
Received on Tuesday, 4 March 2003 16:38:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 13:57:44 GMT