W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > January to March 1997

RE: Open Issues - Versioning

From: Yaron Goland <yarong@microsoft.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 1997 18:21:02 -0800
Message-ID: <11352BDEEB92CF119F3F00805F14F485022843A2@RED-44-MSG>
To: "'Judith Slein'" <slein@wrc.xerox.com>
Cc: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
2) Definitely. It was agreed at the last author's meeting that all
resources must have links to the tree handle. Though this requirement
may have to be altered in the face of fully distributed versioned trees.
This is an issue that requires a lot of thought. I personally haven't
put in the time, yet. IE 4.0 beta is near ship so I am totally slammed.

3) The answer to the question is tightly tied to the current spec which
is going to have its versioning system radically altered. As I said, I
haven't thought fully about distributed versioning so I don't have good
answers.

		Yaron

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Judith Slein [SMTP:slein@wrc.xerox.com]
> Sent:	Tuesday, February 11, 1997 7:53 AM
> To:	Yaron Goland
> Cc:	w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
> Subject:	RE: Open Issues - Versioning
> 
> At 08:52 PM 2/7/97 PST, Yaron Goland wrote:
> >1. Yes. This issue will be further explored in the context of
> >distributed versioning, even though it occurs on centralized
> versioning
> >systems.
> 
> OK
> 
> >2. These links all are defined in the specification, though I think
> >predecessor got dropped on the editing floor. The NextVersion gives
> the
> >successor relationship and TreeHandle provides the versioning tree
> >identifier.
> 
> Just to double-check:  In the spec, a versioned resource does NOT have
> a
> link to the TreeHandle.  Is this an oversight?
> 
> >3. That is authentication and is orthogonal to this specification.
> 
> Well, this is an area that I don't understand very well, but . . . I
> don't
> think what I am talking about is authentication really.  It's not that
> I'm
> trying to masquerade as somebody else.  It's just that I'm trying to
> check
> in a resource that I never checked out, or that somebody else checked
> out.
> Whatever lock tokens do for you in the context of locking, that's what
> I'm
> looking for here.  If you need lock tokens, why don't you need
> checkout
> tokens?  If you don't need checkout tokens, why do you need lock
> tokens?
> 
> >
> >		Yaron
> >
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From:	Judith Slein [SMTP:slein@wrc.xerox.com]
> >>Sent:	Friday, February 07, 1997 12:44 PM
> >>To:	Jim Whitehead
> >>Cc:	w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
> >>Subject:	Re: Open Issues - Versioning
> >>
> >>Here are some more versioning questions that we discussed informally
> during
> >>the break at the Irvine meeting:
> >>
> >>1.  Does the versioning model allow a given resource to belong to
> multiple
> >>version trees?
> >>
> >>2.  It needs to be possible to navigate from each version to its
> >>predecessor.  It also needs to be possible to find out for any
> resource
> >>which version tree(s) it belongs to. 
> >>
> >>3. There needs to be some mechanism for guaranteeing that the person
> who is
> >>checking something in is the same one who checked it out.   
> >>
> >>--Judy
> >>Name:			Judith A. Slein
> >>E-Mail:			slein@wrc.xerox.com
> >>Internal Phone:  	8*222-5169
> >>External Phone:		(716) 422-5169
> >>Fax:			(716) 265-7133
 >>MailStop:		128-29E
> >>
> >
> >
> Name:			Judith A. Slein
> E-Mail:			slein@wrc.xerox.com
> Internal Phone:  	8*222-5169
> External Phone:		(716) 422-5169
> Fax:			(716) 265-7133
> MailStop:		128-29E
> 
Received on Wednesday, 12 February 1997 10:18:00 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:43:42 GMT