- From: Rick Rupp <Rick.Rupp@merant.com>
- Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 17:44:30 -0700
- To: "'John Hall'" <johnhall@evergo.net>, ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
- Message-ID: <F3B2A0DB2FC1D211A511006097FFDDF5036B427B@beavmail.merant.com>
A version-controlled resource is really just a handle to a version resource contained within a version-history resource. There could be many version-controlled resource pointing to the same version. Deleting a version when deleting a version-controlled resource does not make any sense. What is not clear is how a client can delete a version or version-history resource when the server only supports the version-control feature. Maybe what needs to be stated is a version-history resource MUST be deleted when the version-controlled resource is deleted if the server only supports the version-control feature. -----Original Message----- From: John Hall [mailto:johnhall@evergo.net] Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2001 4:54 PM To: 'Rick Rupp'; ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org Subject: RE: Confusion: Removing a resource from version control I was not planning on implementing a version-history feature. I see absolutely no problems with supporting the working resource feature with anything I've said. I wasn't planning on supporting workspaces, but I don't see any problems there that aren't inherent in being able to delete individual versions. Although you can keep an object around that allows you to retrieve the version history of a completely deleted resource, I don't understand how that can be done without eventual name collisions. Say I create foo/bar.txt as a version controlled resource. If I wanted a separate version history object, I could put it in some place like /vhist/foo/bar.txt Now someone wants to delete foo/bar.txt -- OK, I delete it but not /vhist/foo/bar.txt That works until someone tries to create a new foo/bar.txt that they wish to be a version controlled resource. I have a collision with /vhist/foo/bar.txt and THIS foo/bar.txt is completely distinct from the original. -----Original Message----- From: Rick Rupp [mailto:Rick.Rupp@merant.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2001 4:22 PM To: 'John Hall'; 'ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org' Subject: RE: Confusion: Removing a resource from version control I disagree that version history should be deleted if you delete the version controlled resource. Section 5 of the draft clearly states the version history resource exists in a server defined namespace and therefore is unaffected by any deletion or movement of a version controlled resource. If you require the version history to be deleted you will cause serious problems for a server that supports the workspace and working resource feature. -----Original Message----- From: John Hall [mailto:johnhall@evergo.net] Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2001 3:52 PM To: 'Clemm, Geoff'; 'DeltaV' Subject: RE: Confusion: Removing a resource from version control Intro about me at bottom. "In order to remove a resource at a given URL from version control, the client can replace the resource under version control with a non-version-controlled copy of that resource. For example, a client can COPY the version-controlled resource to a temporary location, DELETE the version-controlled resource, and then MOVE the copy from the temporary location back to the original URL. Note that the versions already created for the version-controlled resource will continue to exist at their server-defined locations." Is that clearer? Cheers, Geoff ================================================================= When you DELETE a version-controlled resource, I strongly believe that all information for that VCR and all versions already created should go to the great bit bucket in the sky. As I understand your formulation, I would have severe problems in modifying my DAV server (with versioning support) to support DELTAV using this behavior. I would prefer this formulation / behavior: "In order to remove a resource at a given URL from version control, the client can replace the resource under version control with a non-version-controlled copy of that resource. For example, a client can COPY the version-controlled resource to a temporary location, DELETE the version-controlled resource, and then MOVE the copy from the temporary location back to the original URL. Note that the versions already created for the version-controlled resource will NO LONGER BE AVAILABLE. If you wish to remove a resource at a given URL from version control while also retaining a previous revision history, then you should MOVE the resource to a new save location and COPY the current version back to the original URL." ========== My formulation is based explicitly on the idea that some implementations and some customers are not keeping track of legal documents and therefore deleting old versions is highly desired if not required. A server shouldn't be forced to keep data that a client is willing to specifically state that it doesn't want. I think a far better manner of achieving your goals is simply to allow the VERSION-CONTROL method to turn version-control for a resource at a given URL off (if supported by the server). That allows you to achieve your above objectives (no new versions, but keep the old ones at the same URLs) without changing the usefulness of the DELETE command. ====================================================== John Hall is an engineer working on the Xythos development team to modify their DAV (with revision additions) server to support DELTAV as well as other-party proprietary DAV versioning systems.
Received on Tuesday, 12 June 2001 20:54:20 UTC