From oak-dev-return-3165-apmail-jackrabbit-oak-dev-archive=jackrabbit.apache.org@jackrabbit.apache.org Tue Dec 18 15:45:08 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-jackrabbit-oak-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-jackrabbit-oak-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 8718ED572 for ; Tue, 18 Dec 2012 15:45:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 20316 invoked by uid 500); 18 Dec 2012 15:45:08 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-jackrabbit-oak-dev-archive@jackrabbit.apache.org Received: (qmail 20265 invoked by uid 500); 18 Dec 2012 15:45:07 -0000 Mailing-List: contact oak-dev-help@jackrabbit.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: oak-dev@jackrabbit.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list oak-dev@jackrabbit.apache.org Received: (qmail 20024 invoked by uid 99); 18 Dec 2012 15:45:06 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 18 Dec 2012 15:45:06 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of julian.reschke@gmx.de designates 212.227.17.21 as permitted sender) Received: from [212.227.17.21] (HELO mout.gmx.net) (212.227.17.21) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 18 Dec 2012 15:44:58 +0000 Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net ([10.1.76.19]) by mrigmx.server.lan (mrigmx001) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0LxrcA-1Szfc212vc-015GCl for ; Tue, 18 Dec 2012 16:44:38 +0100 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 18 Dec 2012 15:44:37 -0000 Received: from mail.greenbytes.de (EHLO [192.168.1.104]) [217.91.35.233] by mail.gmx.net (mp019) with SMTP; 18 Dec 2012 16:44:37 +0100 X-Authenticated: #1915285 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX18YTM4ZSLYYeIzPRSUTidBGptl6kLvZEoBZSjwChI 8axUP+H1Vn8rEG Message-ID: <50D08F65.7060602@gmx.de> Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2012 16:44:37 +0100 From: Julian Reschke User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: oak-dev@jackrabbit.apache.org CC: Tommaso Teofili Subject: OT: normative language, was: Conflict handling in Oak References: <50C8A6CD.6070809@apache.org> <9C0FC4C8E9C29945B01766FC7F9D389817293D5A8C@eurmbx01.eur.adobe.com> <6C2D2129-C1CB-4376-B703-9E25C7D8BA88@adobe.com> <026FF5D5-B358-4D74-9DFA-8886814E9C29@adobe.com> In-Reply-To: <026FF5D5-B358-4D74-9DFA-8886814E9C29@adobe.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On 2012-12-18 15:12, Tommaso Teofili wrote: > > On 18/dic/2012, at 09:49, Felix Meschberger wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Just remember that "MAY" is difficult to handle by developers: Can I depend on it or not ? What if the "MAY" feature does not exist ? What if I develop on an implementation providing the "MAY" feature and then running on an implementation not providing the "MAY" feature ? >> >> In essence, a "MAY" feature basically must be considered as non-existing :-( >> >> All in all, please don't use "MAY". Thanks from a developer ;-) > > I remember such a pain when dealing with browser compliance to HTTP spec some years ago, SHOULD / MAY [NOT] were my enemies :-) > ... ...in which case you should read the new spec(s) and provide feedback before they get finalized :-) (-> http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/wiki) Best regards, Julian