Hi, I have now changed the default for the autoCheckout property of versioning. This is now "false". I did not change the other property default values.
Regards Felix On 23.09.2010 16:13, Felix Meschberger wrote: > Hi, > > Am 23.09.2010 15:50, schrieb Justin Edelson: >> Is the problem you're referring to SLING-1797 or something larger? > > This is just the issue to track the change of the default. > > What I have in mind is effectively the case where something now > succeeds, which used to fail: modifying a checked-in node. > > Regards > Felix > >> >> As far as I know, the only non-backwards-compatible change is that >> something[1] which would otherwise fail now succeeds. Everything else >> that was done in SLING-1573 was (or at least should be) >> backwards-compatible. >> >> To me, this type of non-backwards-compatible change is acceptable, but >> can understand if I'm in the minority on that. >> >> Justin >> >> [1] modifying a versionable and checked-in node >> >> On 9/23/10 3:13 AM, Felix Meschberger wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> I just stumbled on a problem we have internally caused by the new >>> versioning support; so I would like to pick this up again. >>> >>> As of SLING-1573 [1] a modification operation by default tries to >>> checkout and checkin if required. In fact the issue also notes that this >>> is not strictly backwards compatible. >>> >>> IMHO we should really strive for being backwards compatible if at all >>> possible, particularly in a case where "per-default-enablement" of a new >>> feature can be done with simple configuration provision. >>> >>> Therefore I suggest we should change the default to being "no versioning >>> at all" (tracked with SLING-1796 [2]). >>> >>> Regards >>> Felix >>> >>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SLING-1573 >>> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SLING-1796 >>> >>> Am 14.06.2010 17:30, schrieb Justin Edelson: >>>> 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 >>>> >> >>
