Today,
Morgen, Randy, Bobby and I discussed this thread from the Cosmo-dev
list: http://lists.osafoundation.org/pipermail/cosmo-dev/2007-
February/002870.html on IRC.
IRC Transcript: http://wiki.osafoundation.org/script/
getIrcTranscript.cgi?channel=cosmo&date=20070314
We now have the notion of an 'item soup' in Chandler Hub (woohoo!)
which allows us to do all kinds of wonderful things like keep items
that show up in multiple collections up-to-date in all collections
without having to wait for a Chandler Desktop client to sync and
reconcile changes made to the item in one collection with instances
of that item in other collections.
However, the downside is that it ruins our plans to use Chandler
Hub's 'lack of support for 1 item in multiple collections' as a stop-
gap measure against rampant updating of items that were originally
shared with read-only access.
To recap, the scenario is this:
User -Nebuchadnezzar shares Item 'Lunch with Nero' with User-Batsheva
via the read-only Collection 'Nebuchadnezzar's Collection'.
User-Batsheva adds Item 'Lunch with Nero' to another Collection
'Batsheva's Collection' which she shares with read-write access.
Question: Does it matter if User-Batsheva subscribes to 'Batsheva's
Collection' read-write or publishes 'Batsheva's Collection'?
Any changes User-Batsheva makes to Item 'Lunch with Nero' will get
propagated back to User-Nebuchadnezzar even if User-Nebuchadnezzar
does *not* subscribe to 'Batsheva's Collection'.
Why?
Because Chandler Hub now supports item soups. So, even though changes
to 'Lunch with Nero' don't get synced up to Chandler Hub via
Batsheva's 'Nebuchadnezzar's Collection. They *will* reach User-
Nebuchadnezzar via Collection 'Red-Breasted' on Chandler Hub, since
Chandler Hub treats the Item 'Lunch with Nero' as a single item,
which once updated on the server in 'Batsheva's Collection' will also
get updated in 'Nebuchadnezzar's Collection'.
Both Nebuchadnezzar and Batsheva publish their shares to Chandler Hub
or the same instance of Chandler Server using Chandler Desktop
(meaning, everyone is speaking 'Morse Code').
So...What are our options?
1. Rel note this and live with it for Preview.
2. Ideal from the design perspective: Per-item access controls.
Batsheva should never be allowed to edit the Item 'Danger, Will
Robinson' no matter what other collections she adds it to.
3. Segregate the item soup by account. This means that Batsheva's
changes to 'Lunch with Nero' will reach Nebuchadnezzar, *only* if
Nebuchadnezzar subscribes to 'Batsheva's Collection' as well.
4. No item soup on Chandler Hub.
Morgen, Randy, Bobby? Is this accurate?
Mimi
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Open Source Applications Foundation "Design" mailing list
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/design
