Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Version manifest should recreate missing versions #907

Open
justinlittman opened this issue Aug 6, 2024 · 5 comments · May be fixed by #908
Open

Version manifest should recreate missing versions #907

justinlittman opened this issue Aug 6, 2024 · 5 comments · May be fixed by #908
Assignees

Comments

@justinlittman
Copy link
Contributor

justinlittman commented Aug 6, 2024

When writing a new object and the version > 1, entries should be made in the version manifest for previous versions. Those previous versions should be marked as permanently_withdrawn and have no date. The head version should be set to the version.

@jcoyne
Copy link
Contributor

jcoyne commented Aug 6, 2024

@justinlittman can you say more about why we need to write these versions? Why not just have the actual versions in the manifest?

@justinlittman
Copy link
Contributor Author

Otherwise PURL would not to understand that these versions were implicitly withdrawn. This avoids PURL having to be aware of such logic.

@justinlittman justinlittman self-assigned this Aug 7, 2024
@justinlittman justinlittman linked a pull request Aug 7, 2024 that will close this issue
@jcoyne
Copy link
Contributor

jcoyne commented Aug 7, 2024

@justinlittman Where in purl does it care about missing versions?

@justinlittman
Copy link
Contributor Author

When an object is public then dark then public, it's earlier user versions are deleted from stacks. When it is made public, there is a requirement to indicate that earlier user versions existed, but were withdrawn.

@andrewjbtw Is this a correct understanding of the requirement?

@andrewjbtw
Copy link

@justinlittman Sorry, I missed the question in the ticket here. Yes, that's the correct understanding.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants