Next message: jamsden@us.ibm.com: "Re: Versioning TeleConf Agenda, 4/24/00 (Monday) *1-2pm*EST"
From: jamsden@us.ibm.com
To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
Message-ID: <852568CD.001F1D6B.00@d54mta03.raleigh.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 00:15:56 -0400
Subject: Re: Initializing a new workspace using an RSR
I now agree with Geoff, selecting the revision in the workspace is all that
is needed.
From: geoffrey.clemm@rational.com
If a workspace tracks the revisions it selects in a DAV:revision-set
property, is there any need for a set of versioned resources
to define its scope (since the revisions effectively define the
set of versioned resources)?
From: jamsden@us.ibm.com
No, but I just don't think of it that way. That is, I don't think
of the workspace as just a bunch of revisions, but rather versioned
resource and some revision of those resources. Either could change
independently of the other.
What important use case is addressed by keeping these two sets
independent? When would you want the set of versioned resources
associated with a workspace to be different from the set of
versioned resources implied by the set of revisions and working
resources selected by the workspace? I know of no existing versioning
system that makes this distinction.
I can see that your approach would work
too, its just that it might be useful to retain the knowledge about
which versioned resources you are interested in separately so you
can change the revision without changing the versioned
resource. For example, you might want to just change the label,
activity, or configuration, and not have to change the versioned
resource too to select a different revision.
What does "changing the label, activity, or configuration" mean,
other than changing the workspace to select the revisions implied
by that label, activity, or configuration?
Cheers,
Geoff