DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT <http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14921>. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14921 reported entity tags differ between HEAD/GET and PROPFIND ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2003-01-29 18:29 ------- I'm not sure that I agree with the analysis. First of all, RFC2616 doesn't define a specific resolution for etags. (all this probably only applies to the fs backend) The issue here seems to be that the resource's etag starts it's life as a weak one, and then turns into a strong etag after some delay. This works fine if you discover an already existing resource using GET/HEAD/PROPFIND, but leads to ugly results if a client takes the entity tag returned by a PUT as validator for subsequent PUT operations (because upon PUT, the entity tag returned is always a weak one, because it's "fresh"). As far as the If-* headers defined in RFC2616 are concerned (not the If: defined in RFC2518), strong comparison should be applied to etags (end of para 13.3.3). --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
