On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 5:19 PM, Gregor Martynus <gregor@martynus.net> wrote:
> Hey everyone,
>
> Imagine the following setup: 3 databases with 2 cont. replications:
>
> "user/joe"
>      ||
>      || cont. replication (filtered)
>      ||
>      \/
> "shared/123"
>      ||
>      || cont. replication
>      ||
>      \/
> "user/sarah"
>
> Joe (user/joe) is sharing a list of documents with an extra database (shared/123) and a filtered replication. Sarah
> (user/sarah) subscribed to the Joe's shared documents with another cont. replication.
>
> So far, so awesome.
>
> And now the Problem:
>
> 1. Sarah deletes Joe's documents and stops the replication.
> 2. Sarah changes her mind, she wants to have the documets back again
> 3. it doesn't work, because new revisions have been added for each deleted document, the shared documents do not get replicated because of the conflicts.
>
> And here I am, and don't see  a "couch way" to solve this problem. Neither do I see a simple workaround.
>
> Is there anything you can think of, to solve or work around this problem? Or is this kind of "sharing" between user databases broken by design?
>
> --
> Gregor
>
Maybe a solution would be to save each version of the document as a
document. Then Sarah would continue to get each changes even if she
stopped to follow Joe for a time. In short don't change a document but
create a new one each time you make a change in.

- benoit