Re: Version issues

Jim Whitehead (ejw@ics.uci.edu)
Thu, 1 Apr 1999 17:10:15 -0800 

From: Jim Whitehead <ejw@ics.uci.edu>
To: Versioning <ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1999 17:10:15 -0800
Message-ID: <005a01be7ca5$91031920$d115c380@ics.uci.edu>
Subject: Re: Version issues



-----Original Message-----
From: Chris Kaler (Exchange) [mailto:ckaler@exchange.microsoft.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 1999 11:29 AM
To: 'jamsden@us.ibm.com'
Cc: gclemm@atria.com; ejw@ics.uci.edu; dgd@cs.bu.edu;
Cragun.Bruce@gw.novell.com; sridhar.iyengar@mv.unisys.com;
bradley_sergeant@intersolv.com; ABabich@filenet.com
Subject: RE: Version issues


For viewing this makes perfect sense.  However, how do I
do this with checkouts.  I want to do the exact same thing
(manage from the client).

Chris

-----Original Message-----
From: jamsden@us.ibm.com [mailto:jamsden@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 1999 6:39 AM
To: Chris Kaler (Exchange)
Cc: jamsden@us.ibm.com; gclemm@atria.com; ejw@ics.uci.edu;
dgd@cs.bu.edu; Cragun.Bruce@gw.novell.com;
sridhar.iyengar@mv.unisys.com; Chris Kaler (Exchange);
bradley_sergeant@intersolv.com; ABabich@filenet.com
Subject: RE: Version issues




If your client doesn't want to use workspaces, that's fine. Just never
create workspaces and specify a label on all access to versioned resources.
If you do this, then the default workspace wouldn't be used either. Your
client can organize the labels any way it wants including implementing
something like a workspace in order to provide the proper revision label
for each URL. There's nothing in our current model that prevents this or
requires that you use workspaces. Non-versioning aware clients will have to
use the default workspace though as they can't specify revisions with
labels.






"Chris Kaler (Exchange)" <ckaler@Exchange.Microsoft.com> on 03/15/99
01:47:04 PM

To:   Jim Amsden/Raleigh/IBM
cc:   gclemm@atria.com, ejw@ics.uci.edu, dgd@cs.bu.edu,
      Cragun.Bruce@gw.novell.com, sridhar.iyengar@mv.unisys.com,
      bradley_sergeant@intersolv.com, ABabich@filenet.com
Subject:  RE: Version issues




If I want to view a document store as a file system, I don't care
about workspaces.  I want to version my documents, like I do, say
in the VMS file system.  I don't want to think about workspaces.

If I am tracking the information on the client I don't necessarily
want it tracked on the server.  I might have a good reason, e.g., I
don't want to waste server resources or time.

The model needs to accommodate these.

Chris
-----Original Message-----
From: jamsden@us.ibm.com [mailto:jamsden@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Monday, March 15, 1999 10:33 AM
To: Chris Kaler (Exchange)
Cc: jamsden@us.ibm.com; gclemm@atria.com; ejw@ics.uci.edu;
dgd@cs.bu.edu; Cragun.Bruce@gw.novell.com;
sridhar.iyengar@mv.unisys.com; Chris Kaler (Exchange);
bradley_sergeant@intersolv.com; ABabich@filenet.com
Subject: RE: Version issues




[CK2] Two points - and they represent different customer segments.
      (1) This isn't my model.  I have lots of unrelated documents
          and, as a level 1 client app, this complicates everything.
      (2) There are cases, NT for example, where workspaces will have
          real scalability problems.  I may want/need to manage the
          state on the client not the server.
How do workspaces complicate things and for whom? I agree they make a
little more work for servers to do the revision selection, but I think it's
better to have that complexity in the server not the many clients that
access the server. You get much better reuse and simplify what clients and
users have to do. Isn't that a good thing?

Also, just because there's workspaces doesn't mean a client can't implement
its own model with labels, properties, other resource types, etc.
Workspaces aren't a restriction for clients, they're a service.