W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > October to December 1998

RE: Version merging questions

From: Chris Kaler <ckaler@microsoft.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Dec 1998 11:01:52 -0800
Message-ID: <4FD6422BE942D111908D00805F3158DF0A757954@RED-MSG-52>
To: "'Geoffrey M. Clemm'" <gclemm@tantalum.atria.com>
Cc: muniz@inf.puc-rio.br, w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
I guess I think of it a little different.  There is an "un-modifiable" list
and a "modifiable" one.  The first is managed by the server and represents
what the server knows to be correct.  The second is managed by the user and
could be totally wrong.  

I think both of our points are valid and true and that we are essentially
saying the same thing.

Cheers,
Chris

		-----Original Message-----
		From:	Geoffrey M. Clemm [mailto:gclemm@tantalum.atria.com]
		Sent:	Tuesday, December 01, 1998 8:26 AM
		To:	Chris Kaler
		Cc:	muniz@inf.puc-rio.br; w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
		Subject:	Re: Version merging questions

		   From: Chris Kaler <ckaler@microsoft.com>

		   What I believe we have specified to date is that there
are "conceptually"
		   two revision graphs.  There is a graph that the server
maintains and
		   asserts is correct and there is a graph that is specified
by the client
		   that may be incorrect.

		I disagree.  It is not an issue of correctness or
incorrectness, but
		rather an issue of modifiable and non-modifiable predecessor
		relations.  The reason to maintain a tree of non-modifiable
		predecessor relations is just a recognition of the fact that
many
		implementations of branching and delta storage make it very
expensive
		or even impossible to move a version from one branch to
another.
		Logically, the predecessor in this tree is no more "correct"
than
		the modifiable predecessors created by the MERGE method.

		Cheers,
		Geoff
Received on Tuesday, 1 December 1998 14:01:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:43:48 GMT