- From: Clemm, Geoff <gclemm@rational.com>
- Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 14:33:15 -0500
- To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
From: Tim Ellison [mailto:Tim_Ellison@uk.ibm.com] "Clemm, Geoff" <gclemm@rational.com> wrote: > If it is a change that results in a change to the DAV:checked-in > property of any member of the baseline controlled collection > (e.g. CHECKIN, UPDATE, MERGE), then it is considered a change to > the version-controlled configuration, and such a change MUST be > rejected unless the VCCn is checked out, or if auto-versioning is > appropriately set for the VCCn. I'm left wondering why this is so. On the face of it, these postconditions mean that where a baseline-controlled collection has a checked-in version-controlled configuration there is a guarantee that the membership of the configuration (rooted at the baseline-controlled collection) is the same as that represented by the checked-in version-controlled configuration -- however, that only covers the checked-in version-controlled members of the configuration ... there can be variance by non-version-controlled members and/or checked-out version-controlled members. So what is the value of this postcondition? The purpose of these postconditions is so that you can get some default baselining behavior for a baselining-unaware client, just as DAV:auto-version on a VCR gives you default versioning behavior for a versioning-unaware client. In particular, the reasonable time to automatically create a new baseline would be when it would capture a different value than the current baseline, (i.e. when the DAV:checked-in version of one of the version-controlled members has changed). Cheers, Geoff
Received on Friday, 11 January 2002 14:34:18 UTC