[cosmo-dev] OOTB collection and iCal3
jared at wordzoo.com
Wed Oct 31 13:08:14 PDT 2007
Brian Moseley wrote:
> Jared, can you calculate the number of people who access home
> collections by path rather than by uid (those requests whose uri-paths
> begin with /dav but not with /dav/users, /dav/item, or
It's somewhat difficult to put mush all that together down to "number of
But I've scanned through lots of logs after extracting /dav paths and
taken away some impressions.
There are a number of iCal 3.x new-signup users getting bitten. I'd be
in favor of a patch to fix the creation of new default collections that
use an underscore instead of space.
If there was a patch against 0.8 branch that did this during initial
collection creation and was eye-ball verifiable as correct, I'd apply
that patch to the Hub immediately without it being included in any
formal Cosmo release yet.
I'm surprised at the number of iCal 3.x users. I need to rework the
metrics to split off that client now, for sure.
There are a number of users 2-5 a day who are getting to
/dav/username/Foo%20Bar via the account browser (referer has /browse).
Sometimes I can see those people proceed to put those in an iCal 3.x
client or add tickets.
People have created some of their own collections (not the default) that
There's a smattering (couple a day) of neon/command-line users. Here's
an interesting academic project log:
There are a large number of regular Lightning users (it looks like) who
are using ticketed /dav/username/uuid?ticket=blah forms. Those would
not be affected by the proposed retroactive rename, but do fit the query
that bcm posed above, so worth noting.
I'm pretty torn on retroactive fixing. I think if we fixed
new-collection creation to not have spaces, the vast majority of our
real-world issues would go away.
My overall guess is that perhaps 5 people would be affecting by changing
their collections "from under them" to remove spaces.
I'm 100% for not creating a default collection with a space, ASAP (with
display name as anything). Does the proposal go further to ban creation
of new collections (manually) with spaces in the resource name? I think
I'd be against that since it's a valid thing to want to do.
Is the proposal to change *all* collections with resource names with a
space, or just the "first" one retroactively? I supposed it's not
trivial to figure out which collections should be affected if we're
talking about a subset. Essentially all users have at least 1
collection with a space, though few users are accessing it currently.
More information about the cosmo-dev