On 14 Jun 2010, at 13:23, Justin Edelson wrote: > On 6/14/10 3:02 PM, Ian Boston wrote: >> A quick question, >> >> Does every modification create a new version or is versioning only enabled >> if a parameter to request a new version is set ? > Right now, every request does a checkin upon completion for any node > which was checked out during the request. So theoretically it would work > with your current code as the checkout is being done by a different > servlet (at least that's what it sounds like).
The concern is we have 100s of updates to some nodes and we don't want to create new versions of every update, only one or two. If we cant turn off creating new versions on every update, we are going to be in trouble. so what we need is checkin+checkout if and only if the parameter :save=1 is set ? or something like that. > >> >> We have some very active modifications were we don't want versions, unless >> we explicitly request it. >> We also have a separate servlet that we use for saving versions and listing >> them. >> >> The code looks right, although I am not clear if it leaves the node in a >> checked out state ? If it leaves it in a checked in state, its going to be >> read only (iirc) > Any node which was checked in before the operation is run should be > checked in when it is finished. This seems like the right default > behavior to me, but I'm open to discussing this as well as providing > separate operations for explicit checkout and checkin. > > It would be natural once the post servlet supports versioning to pull in > the Sakai GET versioning servlets, assuming you're ok with that. Yes, probably, reducing the number of servlets, classloaders and code base is always a good thing. Ian > > Justin > >> >> Ian >> >> >> On 14 Jun 2010, at 09:30, Justin Edelson wrote: >> >>> I'm starting to hack on the post servlet to get it to support JCR >>> versioning. It is actually much simpler than I thought it would be. >>> Which leads me to believe I'm missing something big :) >>> >>> Would appreciate any comments/feedback: >>> http://codereview.appspot.com/1690041 >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Justin >> >
