W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > July to September 2001

RE: Webdav issue: UNLOCK_BY_NON_LOCK_OWNERS

From: Eric Sedlar <Eric.Sedlar@oracle.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 10:32:49 -0700
To: "Jason Crawford" <ccjason@us.ibm.com>
Cc: "Webdav WG" <w3c-dist-auth@w3c.org>
Message-ID: <NDBBLFOFMCKOOMBDHDBKEEGGCCAA.Eric.Sedlar@oracle.com>
Well, checkout doesn't allow things to timeout, nor can you grab
a resource checked out into another workspace the way you can grab
somebody else's lock.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jason Crawford [mailto:ccjason@us.ibm.com]
> Sent: Sunday, August 19, 2001 9:20 AM
> To: Eric Sedlar
> Cc: Webdav WG
> Subject: RE: Webdav issue: UNLOCK_BY_NON_LOCK_OWNERS
> 
> 
> 
> <<
> The other issue, Geoff, is that people are using LOCK as a poor person's
> CHECKOUT, also assuming that LOCK's won't timeout.
> >>
> I agree.
> 
> <<
>   The RFC2518 revision
> should clearly state that LOCKs aren't to be used for this purpose.
> >>
> ???? - I assume the purpose of locking is to avoid lost updates.  What is
> the distinction between a "poor man's CHECKOUT"  and "avoidance 
> of the lost
> update problem"?   In the absense of actual versioning, aren't they the
> same?
> 
> J.
> 
> 
> 
Received on Tuesday, 21 August 2001 13:27:13 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:43:56 GMT