Re: Exclusive Locking: design in a nutshell

C. Michael Pilato wrote:

> Mark Phippard <MarkP@softlanding.com> writes:
>
>
>>What happens in the DAV spec if the user later cancels their LOCK? Do
>>those previous PUT's get discarded or committed? If the former, then it
>>seems odd that the DAV server should have previously handed out those now
>>invalid versions to someone that did a GET.
>
>
> This is my only concern with the current proposal. It would seem,
> though, that LOCK cancellation can be accomplished by remembering what
> the resource looked like at the time the LOCK was taken out, and if
> the LOCK is aborted, simply commit one more time with the lock removal
> and content reversion.

If the LOCK tracked both who locked it and the revision at which the LOCK was
issued, then it would indeed be trivial to revert the changes. But I'm with
Brane and Mark that this is not the correct way to handle it. If we are to
support cancelling a LOCK and reverting the changes, I cannot see any way to get
around having the changes be part of a private transaction and not exposed as
HEAD. Otherwise the interim changes will lead to inconsistent views for all
users except those who had the LOCK.

John

-- 
John Peacock
Director of Information Research and Technology
Rowman & Littlefield Publishing Group
4501 Forbes Boulevard
Suite H
Lanham, MD  20706
301-459-3366 x.5010
fax 301-429-5748
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org