On 14 mai 2011, at 15:08, Tom Anderson wrote: > On Wed, 11 May 2011, Serge Huber wrote: > >> Actually I wonder if a better metaphor wouldn't be a local working copy for >> a workspace :) > > I think that's true. The version history is global, so that's like the source > control system. The workspaces are separate, and can contribute to the > history with VersionManager.checkin, and draw on it with, er, > VersionManager.restore? So they're like local working copies. > > It is possible to move changes directly between workspaces using > clone/update/merge, which is a bit like sending and applying patches. With > classical (pre-DVCS) source control, we strongly prefer checking in and > checking out to the use of patches. Is there any preferred mode of working in > JCR? Or does it depend entirely on what one's goals are? >
I think you've answered your own question :) I think that different usages are possible. I think it is best to try out various scenarios and see which one works best for you. Also, until now we have been talking about the specification, but the implementation is important too, because it might be more efficient at some operations than others. So trying out a scenario with a proof of concept is a good idea. Best regards, Serge Huber.
