RE: request for un-version-control feature

> From: [email protected]
> [mailto:[email protected]]On Behalf Of Clemm, Geoff
> Sent: Friday, February 07, 2003 7:38 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: RE: request for un-version-control feature
>
>
>
> Could you motivate the need to unversion-control a resource
> but not delete it?  In particular, should a server that automatically

I don't see why this needs to be coupled. I do understand that there are
cases where servers do not support the concept of un-vcr-ing a resource, but
we have provably two independant implementations that both want/need to
support this feature and are looking for a interoperable way to do it
easily.

> puts all resources under version control fail such a request,
> or just ignore it?

I think in this case it's best to just return 405 (not allowed), just as a
RFC3253-conforming server would do it anyway.

Julian

--
<green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760