- From: Fay, Chuck <CFay@filenet.com>
- Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2001 18:41:17 -0700
- To: John Stracke <francis@ecal.com>, "Clemm, Geoff" <gclemm@rational.com>, ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
- Cc: "'jamsden@us.ibm.com'" <jamsden@us.ibm.com>
I'm glad to see from the meeting notes that I wasn't the only one who wondered about Core versus Basic (Core + checkout + fork control). I agree with Mark and Larry that Core is sufficient to implement versioning, and with Eric that some clients will be perfectly happy to deal with Core-level servers. So I believe DeltaV should have a package which is just Core. I would not replace Core with Basic. Given that decision, I would rename Basic to avoid the implication that it's the minimum package, or otherwise make it clear that Core is the minimum. I disagree with Geoff and JimW that adding checkout and fork control is low cost for any server wishing to be DeltaV-compliant. Recall that checkout requires mutable VCRs on the server which hold intermediate state between checkout and checkin, whereas Core has no such requirement. Core allows all server-resident resources to be immutable, which is arguably a more consistent model than the mixed model with checkout (mutable checked-out VCRs, everything else immutable). For existing versioning servers that disallow mutable objects, the cost of supporting checkout is non-trivial, because code would have to be written to subvert the fundamental design of the server. --Chuck Fay FileNET Corporation, 3565 Harbor Blvd., Costa Mesa, CA 92626 phone: (714) 327-3513, fax: (714) 327-5076, email: cfay@filenet.com
Received on Tuesday, 3 April 2001 21:48:22 UTC