Hi Jan,
> > Oh and by the way, in a use case where there is only one database and you >> don't use compaction because you want to keep everything, well _rev is a >> revision that can be used to see the history of the document. >> > > You still shouldn't and that's what's in the documentation :) Just because > you can tie a skateboard to a car and drive on the highway would make > one hell of a fun ride, you are not advised to do so. :) > Don't worry ;) , on my side i not do this, as I know when I will make compaction, i run a program before compaction that will take care of "archiving" previous rev. I really don't > see the point of renaming an attribute to make it harder to understand it's > role. > The suggestion here is to rename to make it _easier_ to understand > because the connotations "revision" comes with are not entirely > valid for CouchDB. > >> It's like all politically correct terminology where you use a stupid >> expression in order to be as neutral as possible. >> > > You have a point here, it is about avoiding conflict. But I don't think > we're looking for a neutral term here, but one with a better name. > I'd go with _access_token if it weren't too long. _rev is nice and short > and _token might as well be _wibble. API design is hard. > May be it's about conflict, but as it's also a previous release, it's by definition a revision. The fact that the revision is no more there is not changing the fact that it's a revision. That's why if the name is changed, the functionality to access a previous revision should be removed. > > > Cheers > Jan > -- > > > > > IMO if you change this >> attribute name it's even better to remove all possibilities to a access a >> previous rev if still there, and change it's value by a timestamp >> >> >> Regards >> >> 2009/2/24 Antony Blakey <[email protected]> >> >> >>> On 24/02/2009, at 12:51 PM, Antony Blakey wrote: >>> >>> The project founder and the PMC, are all committed to that replication >>> >>>> model, which is derived from Notes. >>>> >>>> >>> BTW I'm the only one in the community that has expressed any strong >>> desire >>> to change this - I'm not implying any community division, just pointing >>> out >>> that it's both an historical artifact, and accepted by the major >>> contributors and committers. >>> >>> Antony Blakey >>> -------------------------- >>> CTO, Linkuistics Pty Ltd >>> Ph: 0438 840 787 >>> >>> Plurality is not to be assumed without necessity >>> -- William of Ockham (ca. 1285-1349) >>> >>> >>> >>> >
