- From: Lisa Dusseault <lisa@xythos.com>
- Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2001 05:03:57 -0700
- To: "Clemm, Geoff" <gclemm@rational.com>, <ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org>
So in our discussion today at the IETF, we realized that the version-history report can also be used to see all values of <checkout-set> and <checkout-fork> for a single version-history. This means that expand-history report isn't needed to support this, only version-history report which is already required. lisa > -----Original Message----- > From: ietf-dav-versioning-request@w3.org > [mailto:ietf-dav-versioning-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Clemm, Geoff > Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2001 7:35 PM > To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org > Subject: RE: ... By the way ... > > > > From: John Hall [mailto:johnhall@evergo.net] > > As I understand it, there is no way for a client to tell that a > working resource has been created. > > VCR checked in, no working resources have been created. Server > doesn't allow forking. Server supports WORKING-RESOURCE and > CHECKOUT-INPLACE. > > ClientA: CHECKOUT <apply-to-version> VCR. > => creates working resource and leaves VCR untouched. > > ClientB: Since VCR is untouched, it is impossible to detect that > CLientA has performed their operation. Therefore: > > CHECKOUT VCR > => 409 Conflict > <checkout-of-checked-out-version-is-forbidden> > > Is there some way I'm missing that Client B could have seen this > one coming? > > Use the DAV:expand-property report to ask for the checkout-set and > checkout-fork properties of the checked-in version, i.e.: > > <D:expand-property xmlns:D="DAV:"> > <D:property name="checked-in"> > <D:property name="checkout-set"/> > <D:property name="checkout-fork"/> > </D:property> > </D:expand-property> > > If the checkout-set is non-empty and checkout-fork is forbidden, > you know the checkout will fail. > > Currently, I don't support forking so only 1 checkout (INPLACE or > WORKING) is allowed. But if I did support multiple checkouts, I'd > still keep a count so I could tell Client B, that forking was > 'discouraged', for example. > > Yes, if the checkout-fork is discouraged, that would be something > you'd want to warn them about (and if they said "do it anyway", you > would know to include the DAV:fork-ok flag with the CHECKOUT). > > Are people implementing this without tracking the count of working > resources created off the versions of a VCR? > > The list of checkouts is important, which is why the server is > required to maintain DAV:checkout-set. > > Cheers, > Geoff
Received on Thursday, 9 August 2001 06:52:48 UTC