- From: James J. Hunt <jjh@ira.uka.de>
- Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 17:11:31 +0100
- To: Tim_Ellison@uk.ibm.com
- CC: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
> Since there are revision control systems that support > a status property, it would make sense to support > it explicitly as an option. > Status can not be implemented as a dead property for > two reason: > 1) a versioned resource or working resource that > is updated or created by a check-out request > should NOT inherit the value of the status > of the version being checked out, instead it > should be set to a server defined base value > or left empty; and > 2) status should be changeable on a version without > creating a new version, similar to label. Functionaly, labels will do it for you. 1) They are not 'inherited' by (i.e., moved to) new versions. 2) They do not require creating a new version to set or remove. Labels will not "do it for me" because they are exclusive. I can not have two version in the same revision history with the label tested! Label is a unique identifier and status denotes the current state of a revision in regards to it processing. James
Received on Friday, 2 February 2001 11:12:00 UTC