Re: [PATCH 3/3] atomic-revprop: Signal the error as a HTTP status code

On 21.09.2010 14:49, Jon Foster wrote: ... http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/dav/main/mod_dav. c?revision=982016&view=markup#l2121 This is the mod_dav function that builds the 207 response from a failed PROPPATCH. It doesn't allow us to add extra XML wherever we want; we on

Re: [PATCH 3/3] atomic-revprop: Signal the error as a HTTP status code

On 21.09.2010 14:12, Daniel Shahaf wrote: Julian Reschke wrote on Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 13:46:13 +0200: Hi, just two comments without having looked at the remainder of the discussion. 1) If you need to augment a standard HTTP response code with additional information, the right thing to use is

Re: [PATCH 3/3] atomic-revprop: Signal the error as a HTTP status code

On 21.09.2010 13:52, Jon Foster wrote: Hi, just two comments without having looked at the remainder of the discussion. Please read my first mail in this [PATCH 3/3] thread, which explains why these choices were made. ... That's the message I read, and I didn't see any consideration of using

Re: [PATCH 3/3] atomic-revprop: Signal the error as a HTTP status code

Hi, just two comments without having looked at the remainder of the discussion. 1) If you need to augment a standard HTTP response code with additional information, the right thing to use is DAV:error (see ). 2) Do not use 412 Pre

Re: What C structure contains the HTTP Headers

On 12.08.2010 22:29, Loren Cahlander wrote: After discussing things with Mike, I an going to be making the changes through the HTTP PROPPATCH method. ... Great! If you have protocol (RFC 3253) specific questions, please do not hesitate to ask. (In doubt cc me directly because I usually do no

Re: Commit to Subversion with XMLHttpRequest

On 12.07.2010 19:43, Jack Bates wrote: I'm considering writing some JavaScript to make commits to Subversion repositories, using XMLHttpRequest Does any code like this already exist? Are there any reasons I haven't thought of, why this would be impossible (or prohibitively difficult?) The purpo

Re: Experiences of a Subversion FS backend developer

On 01.04.2010 21:30, Greg Stein wrote: On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 15:12, Jon Trowbridge wrote: ... WebDAV introduces a huge amount of complexity, but as far as I can tell it buys svn essentially nothing. The design of the protocol We are able to mount svn repositories on desktops/tools/whatever

Re: Experiences of a Subversion FS backend developer

On 31.03.2010 21:20, C. Michael Pilato wrote: ... - "WebDAV sucks. Period." ... Out of curiosity: what's the relation to writing a Subversion FS backend? Best regards, Julian PS: and, of course, it's not true :-)