faq
flatforty
contribute
subscribe
configure
search
rdf
main
parent
thread
|
Re: Small incongruity on the Kontact website
by Helge Hess on Thursday 11/Nov/2004, @05:10
|
While the name suggest that, WebDAV (RFC 2518) does *not* implement any operation related to versioning (point to the section inside the spec ;-).
It does support locking, both optimistic (etags as used in the Kontact resource) as well as pessimistic (LOCK HTTP method).
Versioning is added by RFC 3253 (Versioning Extensions to WebDAV):
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3253.txt
RFC 3253 is not implemented by OGo, and I don't know any client nor server which implements it (Xythos maybe?) Same goes for WebDAV access control (RFC 3744). |
|
|
The Fine Print: The following comments
are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )
|
Re: Small incongruity on the Kontact website
by Charles de Miramon on Thursday 11/Nov/2004, @05:41
|
I think I saw on a mailing list that somebody had started implementing RFC 3253 for the KDE webdav KIO but I don't know if it is finished.
Adding integrated versioning capacity to KDE file operation be it for a local Reiser4 filesystem (maybe RFC 3253 could be implemented as a Reiser4 plugin) or a Webdav server like OGo would be a "killing" feature alonside with a better support for metadata.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Small incongruity on the Kontact website
by Christian Loose on Thursday 11/Nov/2004, @07:07
|
You mean kdenonbeta/deltav? (http://webcvs.kde.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/kdenonbeta/deltav/)
Unfortunately it hasn't been touch since almost two years.
Christian
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Small incongruity on the Kontact website
by Charles de Miramon on Thursday 11/Nov/2004, @07:52
|
Ah, it is sad but, in a way, quite normal. If most WebDaV servers don't support the versioning addition,it is hard to create a community to develop a client and vice-versa. The classical chicken and egg problem.
What are your plan Christian for Cervisia ? Could it be possible to extract from it a light universal versioning client targeted to regular office workers ?
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
|
The Fine Print: The previous
comments are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )
|
|