<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Martin, I dont think this is a bug. > > PUT /files/a.xml > VERSION-CONTROL /files/a.xml > ---> /files/a.xml is now associated with /history/1 > DELETE /files/a.xml > ---> /history/1 has not been deleted > PUT /files/a.xml > ---> /files/a.xml is not under version control > VERSION-CONTROL /files/a.xml > ---> /files/a.xml is now associated with /history/2 (!!) > > That all is correct behaviour according to DeltaV. > > If your intention was to resurrect a.xml in the same history, instead of the second > PUT you would use a special form of the VERSION-CONTROL request (see RFC3253, 6.7): > > DELETE /files/a.xml > ---> /history/1 has not been deleted > VERSION-CONTROL /files/a.xml (using version /history/1/1.0) > ---> /files/a.xml is now associated with /history/1 (!!)
Hmm. Any chance to keep a useful history, if users is allowed to manipulating files with tools like MS web folders? Martin --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
