On Wed, 17 Mar 2004, Ugo Cei wrote: > Unico Hommes wrote: > > I was thinking specifically regarding the choice between Cocoon and > > Slide as a WebDAV server, but I think Slide is the better choice over > > mod_dav/catacomb as well. Simply because it supports more WebDAV (DACL, > > Binding) in a more flexible way. It has an interception mechanism which > > I currently use to publish cache invalidation events to a JMS topic > > with. It has a pluggable storage system that allows you to plugin a > > custom store. There is a lively community actively implementing the > > latest WebDAV specifications. > > Thank you. I had fought with the installation of Slide 2.0beta1 and, > apart from the problem with MacOSX, the installation docs didn't seem to > be either clear or updated, so I decided to try mod_dav, which proved to > be a more pleasant experience, since it worked right out of the box > (these days I tend to disregard products that don't work at the first > try). But after hearing this, I'll give Slide another try.
As another data point, I just went through the process of evaluating slide. The installation went fine but I was not able to get it to interoperate with any client other than the slide command line client. In particular, I simply wasn't able to get Windows XP to work with slide which, unfortunately, was a must for me. I simply couldn't get the cocoon slide block to work. I finally implemented a solution with apache webdav. It had its own interoperability problems but I was able to work through them. -- JP
