Next message: Geoffrey M. Clemm: "Re: WebDAV Versioning Scenarios"
From: jamsden@us.ibm.com
To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
Message-ID: <852568B1.007BC669.00@d54mta03.raleigh.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 17:31:53 -0500
Subject: Re: WebDAV Versioning Scenarios
No. I think we still need the revision selection rule to determine what
revisions are selected on workspace refresh, and to indicate what was used
on the last refresh as an indicator of what's in the workspace. Note that
if the revision selection rule only contain configurations, it never needs
to be refreshed. These are "production" workspaces.
|------------------------+------------------------>
| | Sankar |
| | Virdhagriswaran |
| | <sv@hunchuen.crystali|
| | z.com> |
| | Sent by: |
| | ietf-dav-versioning-r|
| | equest@w3.org |
| | |
| | 03/29/2000 08:20 AM |
| | |
|------------------------+------------------------>
>------------------------|
| |
| To: |
| ietf-dav-versioning@w|
| 3.org |
| cc: |
| Subject: |
| Re: WebDAV Versioning|
| Scenarios |
>------------------------|
<<
So as cool as dynamic revision selection is, I believe we should
excercise self-restraint and commit to static revision selection
for the first version of the versioning protocol.
Once that is widely implemented, and implementors are just dying
to do something more challenging (:-), I'd be happy to consider
adding in dynamic revision selection.
>>>
I second Geoff's observation. It also reduces the implementors need to
introduce new administrative mechanisms to manage rules, etc.
Sankar