On Sun, Mar 25, 2001 at 12:09:10PM +0100, Chris Withers wrote:
> 1. When people using your site don't need to write to the ZODB to use the site
> (it sounds like they do in your case)

The users themselves do not write, but periodically an External Method
receives email via xml and parses it into a bunch of new Zope objects.
Would this cause trouble with Versions? 

> 2. You don't use mounted storages. In particular, Core Session Tracking and
> Version objects seem to have quite a bad time of it when played with together,
> but it's understandable when you think about how CST works.

I'm not sure I understand what you mean by mounted storage.  The site
makes use of LocalFS--is this the kind of thing you are talking about?

> I find versions are generally useful when updating brochurewear (DTML Methods
> and Dcouments) but are limited elsewhere. It's a shame you can't use them with
> WebDAV (guessing here, somebody tell me I'm wrong ;-) or FTP without major
> hackory :-S

I'm curious how Versions failed for you when using mounted storage,
etc.  Were you unable to roll back changes?  Were changes you made
lost?  Was your database corrupted?


Ed Goppelt

Zope-Dev maillist  -  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )

Reply via email to