From owner-freebsd-hackers Sat Jan 31 02:27:20 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id CAA23292 for hackers-outgoing; Sat, 31 Jan 1998 02:27:20 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from phobos.illtel.denver.co.us (abelits@phobos.illtel.denver.co.us [207.33.75.1]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id CAA23287 for ; Sat, 31 Jan 1998 02:27:17 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from abelits@phobos.illtel.denver.co.us) Received: from localhost (abelits@localhost) by phobos.illtel.denver.co.us (8.8.8/8.6.9) with SMTP id CAA09585; Sat, 31 Jan 1998 02:29:06 -0800 Date: Sat, 31 Jan 1998 02:29:04 -0800 (PST) From: Alex Belits To: Terry Lambert cc: rivers@dignus.com, mike@smith.net.au, capriotti0@hotmail.com, capriotti@geocities.com, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, joe.shevland@horizonti.com Subject: Re: WebAdmin In-Reply-To: <199801310708.AAA01106@usr06.primenet.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG X-To-Unsubscribe: mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org "unsubscribe hackers" On Sat, 31 Jan 1998, Terry Lambert wrote: > I think that the atomicity of the transaction for HTML is an implementation > detal; a detail best served by defineing how a transaction is to take place. > > That the HTML post is a "transaction" is seperate from "what to do when > an HTML post is seen and you are an HTML server". Of course, implementation can treat it as a transaction or not. I only mean that HTTP protocol with forms uploaf provides a mechanism that allows HTTP server to use transactions regardless of the model used by client for its actions as long as the client uses HTTP. In other words, one can use any browser or proxy or another server program that replicates its configuration or custom-made client program, and the transactions model won't be broken if the server uses it. If the server doesn't care about transactions (plain CGIs with no locking), transactions support won't magically appear, but IMHO it's reasonable to keep the requirements to server higher than ones to the clients. -- Alex