Further clarified scope of lock_id #227
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…o not alter the content of a file
|
@butonic this was motivated by the fact that EOS allows to alter xattrs no matter the lock state, and I think it makes sense: e.g. I can (further) share a file even if it's being edited by someone. How did you implement the decomposedfs in Reva edge? |
glpatcern
commented
Mar 22, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Follow up from #226: the
lock_idpayload of storage requests that do not alter the content of a file MAY or MAY NOT be honored, because the storage MAY allow for modifying files' metadata (in particular grants or other arbitrary metadata) without enforcing eventual locks.As such, the spec changed from
MUSTtoSHOULD, with an additionalMAYclause.This only affects the comments, the protobuf payloads did not change.