IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [apps-discuss] draft-pbryan-json-patch-04 - comments

Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> Wed, 21 March 2012 06:42 UTC

Return-Path: <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5C5421E8018 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 20 Mar 2012 23:42:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.564
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.564 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.965, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SIfP096Iur4E for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 20 Mar 2012 23:42:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net (mailout-de.gmx.net [213.165.64.22]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id B473421E8040 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Tue, 20 Mar 2012 23:42:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 21 Mar 2012 06:42:52 -0000
Received: from p57A6E8EB.dip.t-dialin.net (EHLO [192.168.178.36]) [87.166.232.235] by mail.gmx.net (mp038) with SMTP; 21 Mar 2012 07:42:52 +0100
X-Authenticated: #1915285
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1/BnRMiO5zBDbC6VZ3eKTpiFiboiwc7XZLMmjom2O yeOLIihWiPugXU
Message-ID: <4F697867.2050500@gmx.de>
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2012 07:42:47 +0100
From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:10.0.2) Gecko/20120216 Thunderbird/10.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Mike Acar <macar@cloudmark.com>
References: <9F0A2492-AE7D-4C12-8BB0-13489FD7F6C1@gmail.com> <1331271383.6504.1.camel@neutron> <4F5E6255.9040402@cloudmark.com> <1331651889.3301.5.camel@neutron> <4F6914D7.5050505@cloudmark.com>
In-Reply-To: <4F6914D7.5050505@cloudmark.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0
Cc: apps-discuss@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] draft-pbryan-json-patch-04 - comments
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2012 06:42:57 -0000

On 2012-03-21 00:37, Mike Acar wrote:
> On 03/13/2012 08:18 AM, Paul C. Bryan wrote:
>> On Mon, 2012-03-12 at 13:53 -0700, Mike Acar wrote:
>>
>>> I'm unsure about test as well. It seems strange to me to express "change
>>> this document if it looks like this" in a patch; if the application
>>> creating the patch doesn't know how the document looks, how can it
>>> create a patch?
>>
>> I'm surprised that it seems so strange, as this is very much like how
>> text-based diff/patches work.
>
> But in diff, the "test" is not optional. The diff (AFAIK anyway) always
> expresses "replace this with that". Patch doesn't.
>
> So I guess I should say it's the optionality that makes it a bit weird
> to me - mixing tested and not-tested operations. When would that make
> sense?
> ...

What makes you think it's optional?

Best regards, Julian

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email