jackrabbit-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Angela Schreiber <anch...@day.com>
Subject Re: [jira] Commented: (JCR-388) add support for RFC 3253 to the simple server
Date Wed, 18 Jul 2007 12:45:13 GMT
hi julian

Julian Reschke wrote:
>> - DeltaVResourceImpl: compliance class should from my point of view 
>> also mention the Label feature
> Angela, please keep in mind that the Label *header* is deprecated, 
> please do not implement it (see <http://www.webdav.org/deltav/>).

but that's a different story isn't it? i was talking about the
compliance class (and the method set).

>> RFC 3253 defines a separate behaviour for version-controlled 
>> collections.

> I'm not completely sure what the issue is? A version controlled 
> collection is a specific type of a regular version controlled resource, 
> it just also records information about version controlled children...

what i meant:

states the following:

"As with any versionable resource, when a collection is put under 
version control, a version history resource is created to contain 
versions for that version-controlled collection. In order to preserve 
standard versioning semantics (a version of a collection should not be 
modifiable), a collection version only records information about the 
version-controlled bindings of that collection.

In order to cleanly separate a modification to the namespace from a 
modification to content or dead properties, a version of a collection 
has no members, but instead records in its 
DAV:version-controlled-binding-set property the binding name and version 
history resource of each version-controlled internal member of that 

A version-controlled collection has all the properties of a collection 
and of a version-controlled resource. In addition, the 
version-controlled-collection feature introduces the following REQUIRED 
property for a version-controlled collection.

14.1.1 DAV:eclipsed-set (computed)

however: the patch provided by jeremi and modified by rob does
not distinguish between collections and non-collection resources.
in both cases the underlying repository Node is made 'versionable'.
consequently both collections and non-collections behave the
same way (i.e. like version-controlled resources), which is from my 
understanding not what the RFC defines. see quote above.

do i miss something?

kind regards

View raw message