COPY collection to an existing resource

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
5 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

COPY collection to an existing resource

Werner Donné

Hi,

Say we want to copy a collection to an existing version controlled
resource in a repository that puts everything under version control
automatically. The version history of the destination should be
kept and the resource should be updated.

What should happen if the source and destination collection have
internal members with the same name? Should the internal members
in the destination collection also be updated or should the
destination collection get new version controlled resources for
those?

Regards,

Werner.
--
Werner Donné  --  Re
Engelbeekstraat 8
B-3300 Tienen
tel: (+32) 486 425803 e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: COPY collection to an existing resource

Julian Reschke

Werner Donné schrieb:

> Hi,
>
> Say we want to copy a collection to an existing version controlled
> resource in a repository that puts everything under version control
> automatically. The version history of the destination should be
> kept and the resource should be updated.
>
> What should happen if the source and destination collection have
> internal members with the same name? Should the internal members
> in the destination collection also be updated or should the
> destination collection get new version controlled resources for
> those?

I think they should be updated, although RFC3253 isn't very clear on
that. Check
<http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/rfc3253.html#rfc.section.1.7> and
<http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis-15.html#rfc.section.9.8.4>.

Best regards, Julian

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: COPY collection to an existing resource

Geoffrey M Clemm

I agree with Julian that this is what should happen.
This is what section 1.7 is intended to make clear (but apparently wasn't fully successful :-).

Cheers,
Geoff


Julian wrote on 07/12/2006 06:07:23 AM:
>
> Werner Donné schrieb:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Say we want to copy a collection to an existing version controlled
> > resource in a repository that puts everything under version control
> > automatically. The version history of the destination should be
> > kept and the resource should be updated.
> >
> > What should happen if the source and destination collection have
> > internal members with the same name? Should the internal members
> > in the destination collection also be updated or should the
> > destination collection get new version controlled resources for
> > those?
>
> I think they should be updated, although RFC3253 isn't very clear on
> that. Check
> <http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/rfc3253.html#rfc.section.1.7> and
> <http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis-15.
> html#rfc.section.9.8.4>.
>
> Best regards, Julian
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: COPY collection to an existing resource

Werner Donné
In reply to this post by Werner Donné

In other words, the position is taken that when a user
copies a collection to an existing destination, both are
likely to be related to the user. Otherwise strange
version histories would result for internal members that
happen to coincide. This position seems reasonable.

There is a practical consequence for the user, however.
Since the operation is recursive, the user has to be aware
of the internal members that coincide at any depth and
make sure that either they are checked out or that their
"auto-version" property is set properly. It is also
necessary that all subcollections at the destination are
checked out or have the appropriate auto-version property.

Regards,

Werner.
--
Werner Donné  --  Re
Engelbeekstraat 8
B-3300 Tienen
tel: (+32) 486 425803 e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: COPY collection to an existing resource

Geoffrey M Clemm

Yes, and note that a client can also just DELETE the target before requesting the COPY, in which case a fresh set of resources would be created at the destination (each with a new version history, if the server automatically puts new resources under version control).

Cheers,
Geof

Werner wrote on 07/13/2006 05:53:37 AM:

>
> In other words, the position is taken that when a user
> copies a collection to an existing destination, both are
> likely to be related to the user. Otherwise strange
> version histories would result for internal members that
> happen to coincide. This position seems reasonable.
>
> There is a practical consequence for the user, however.
> Since the operation is recursive, the user has to be aware
> of the internal members that coincide at any depth and
> make sure that either they are checked out or that their
> "auto-version" property is set properly. It is also
> necessary that all subcollections at the destination are
> checked out or have the appropriate auto-version property.