Re: Locking non-existent paths. Time to discuss.

Ben Collins-Sussman wrote:
>
> On Mar 17, 2005, at 2:58 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:
>
>>
>> What *is* needed is the ability to LOCK an unmapped resource. However,
>> it's completely sufficient to implement this by creating an empty
>> placew holder resource.
>>
>> Thus,
>>
>> LOCK unmapped
>>
>> can be exactly the same as
>>
>> PUT unmapped
>> Content-Length: 0
>>
>> followed by
>>
>> LOCK unmapped
>>
>
> Julian: if we implement the above, the I understand that this sequence
> will work correctly (it's what MS office does):
>
> LOCK url
> --> nonexistent url means creation of locked, 0-byte file.
> PUT url
> --> 0-byte file is overwritten with real content>

Yep.

> But what about a client which runs
>
> LOCK url
> MKCOL url
>
> ?
>
> Won't the MKCOL fail if there's a 0-byte file in the way? Or what if
> the url is the target of a collection COPY/MOVE ?

That's correct, it will fail. Back when the WG made the decision to
deprecate lock-null resources, there was no evidence of clients actually
relyong on the behaviour (if they did, they wouldn't work with IIS, as
far as I can remember).

Best regards, Julian

-- 
<green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org