Re: How to create configurations
jamsden@us.ibm.com
Mon, 5 Apr 1999 22:43:34 -0400
From: jamsden@us.ibm.com
To: "Sankar Virdhagriswaran" <sv@crystaliz.com>
cc: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
Message-ID: <8525674B.000F481B.00@d54mta03.raleigh.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 1999 22:43:34 -0400
Subject: Re: How to create configurations
Sankar,
As with activities, we are considering having a generalized dependency
relationship between configurations that would provide the flexibiltiy you
need for component reuse. This is more general and easier to implement than
nested activities or configurations, and provides simpler semantics. So
this would be like project dependencies in Visual C++, or package
dependencies in Java modeled through imports, etc. For configurations,
adding a configuration to a workspace revision selection rule would
implicitly add all its dependent configurations. Similarly, merging an
activity into a workspace implies merging all its dependent activities as
well. Will this meet your requirements?
"Sankar Virdhagriswaran" <sv@crystaliz.com> on 04/05/99 09:11:40 PM
To: "Chris Kaler (Exchange)" <ckaler@Exchange.Microsoft.com>, Jim
Amsden/Raleigh/IBM, ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
cc:
Subject: Re: How to create configurations
Chris,
> configuration? I guess this begs the question of do we want to prevent
it.
> I know I do.
>
I apologize if this is out of turn. But, you guys have not made it easy for
people who are not in the design team to interact with you folks (see my
other message).
Anyhow, my feeling is that configurations should contain other
configurations (as against what you say). Without this a nested web site
with different authors updating different nested levels of the web site *in
parallel* cannot easily make their work consistent.
I don't know if you were talking about level 1 vs. level 2 however (given
that you folks have.... grump, knash,....)
-------Sankar