Re: [cmis] getAllVersions and PWC

[Jay Brown <jay.brown@us.ibm.com>]

I just checked.  Yes, we do include the PWC in allVersions.  
So there must be more to this conversation that followed.  (?)




Jay Brown
Senior Engineer, ECM Development
IBM Software Group
jay.brown@us.ibm.com
www.linkedin.com/in/parityerror/

Greg Melahn ---03/17/2015 06:34:16 AM---Thanks Jay,  I was reading through those old issues (perhaps I need a hobby) and that was part of wh

From:	Greg Melahn <greg.melahn@alfresco.com>
To:	Jay Brown/Costa Mesa/IBM@IBMUS
Cc:	"cmis@lists.oasis-open.org" <cmis@lists.oasis-open.org>, David Choy <david.choy500@gmail.com>
Date:	03/17/2015 06:34 AM
Subject:	Re: [cmis] getAllVersions and PWC

---

Thanks Jay,  I was reading through those old issues (perhaps I need a hobby) and that was part of why I wanted to ask how, in practice, it was being implemented.

So, does FileNet include the PWC in the response for getAllVersions?

Greg Melahn
Director of Platform Development​
Mobile: +1 919 656 9717
Skype: gregory.melahn

---

From: Jay Brown <jay.brown@us.ibm.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2015 9:20 AM
To: Greg Melahn
Cc: cmis@lists.oasis-open.org; David Choy
Subject: Re: [cmis] getAllVersions and PWC 
 
I found this discussion:
  https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CMIS-431

"In yesterday's Oasis CMIS meeting the TC agreed that it was the intent of the spec that PWC's were not to be considered versions. (when discussing http://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/CMIS-728 ) Although this does not change the fact that the current spec (mistakenly) says otherwise. Since the next version of the spec will reflect this I was going to leave our repository the way that it is since it will eventually be correct when the spec is fixed. Can we change the TCK such that it will no longer call this issue out as an error? I understand that technically it cannot call out the 1.0 compliant interpretation as an error either. Perhaps a warning saying that although this is correct it will be changing in the future?"

Jay Brown
Senior Engineer, ECM Development
IBM Software Group
www.linkedin.com/in/parityerror/

Greg Melahn ---03/17/2015 06:01:07 AM---?Tx David, Certainly that is my opinion also, and there are other sections that support it (e.g. 2.1

From:	Greg Melahn <greg.melahn@alfresco.com>
To:	David Choy <david.choy500@gmail.com>
Cc:	"cmis@lists.oasis-open.org" <cmis@lists.oasis-open.org>
Date:	03/17/2015 06:01 AM
Subject:	Re: [cmis] getAllVersions and PWC
Sent by:	<cmis@lists.oasis-open.org>

---

​Tx David,   

Certainly that is my opinion also, and there are other sections that support it (e.g. 2.1.13.7). 

But there are still a few places in the spec (e.g. 2.1.13.1) that try to clarify that a PWC is not a version in the version series, that end up causing confusion.     So I thought I would check  to make sure other providers were behaving the same way.

tx

Greg Melahn
Director of Platform Development​
Mobile: +1 919 656 9717
Skype: gregory.melahn

---

From: David Choy <david.choy500@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, March 16, 2015 9:46 PM
To: Greg Melahn
Cc: cmis@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [cmis] getAllVersions and PWC 
 
2.2.7.6 says:
"Notes: If a Private Working Copy exists for the version series and the caller has permissions to access it, then it MUST be returned as the first object in the result list."

Seemed to be clear to me. :)



On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 1:45 PM, Greg Melahn <greg.melahn@alfresco.com> wrote:

​I know there was some discussion about this question several years ago, so I am almost afraid to wake up the discussion again.    But I will :-)

Should getAllVersions return the PWC among the results (assuming the caller has access to the PWC)?   By the wording of 2.2.7.6, I think the answer is 'yes'.   But I thought I should check to make sure we are all on the same page.