Skimming RFC3284 it appears to be byte based which seems quite incompatible with couchdb internals.
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 5:37 PM, Robert Newson <[email protected]> wrote: > supporting RFC 3284 format for PUT has been proposed before, and it's generic. > > B. > > On 20 April 2011 21:55, sleepnova <[email protected]> wrote: >> A sudo patch for demonstration. >> >> if(doc._rev=="07769cff70767095e4fb525dc9000b6e"){ >> //Put your patch here >> } >> >> I think above patch would be idempotent even when add or remove an array >> element based on an index. >> >> 2011/4/21 sleepnova <[email protected]> >> >>> A patch which checks document version number might solve this problem. >>> similar to a git commit log >>> >>> >>> 2011/4/21 Aurélien Bénel <[email protected]> >>> >>>> Dear Paul, >>>> >>>> > On the other hand, there's nothing inherently wrong with the PATCH verb >>>> >>>> True, PATCH could be idempotent... It just depends on your patch format. >>>> >>>> I just had a look at your patch operations specification: >>>> - When you add or remove a key/value, this is idempotent. >>>> - However, when you add or remove an array element based on an index, this >>>> is not. >>>> >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> >>>> Aurélien >>> >>> >>> -- >>> - sleepnova >>> >> >> -- >> - sleepnova >> >
