- From: Adrien de Croy <adrien@qbik.com>
- Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 11:03:59 +1200
- To: Henrik Nordstrom <henrik@henriknordstrom.net>
- CC: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
right - in other words, the only way to guarantee security on the patch is to LOCK, in which case why even bother trying to solve race conditions around the PATCH command. The race condition if anywhere is around who gets the LOCK first...:) Henrik Nordstrom wrote: > On mån, 2007-09-10 at 00:41 +1200, Adrien de Croy wrote: > > >> Fair enough. Just still trying to think of what a poor UA / user would >> do once they've been told their patch won't be accepted because the >> thing they are patching has been changed out from underneath. >> > > Then LOCK, GET, [edit], PATCH, UNLOCK, or depending on the use case > > GET, LOCK with If-Match, [edit], PATCH, UNLOCK > > Regards > Henrik > -- Adrien de Croy - WinGate Proxy Server - http://www.wingate.com
Received on Sunday, 9 September 2007 23:03:35 UTC