Randall, Did we miss the chance to review this work before it landed?
B. On 9 November 2011 10:36, Benoit Chesneau <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 11:27 AM, Filipe David Manana > <[email protected]> wrote: >> Randall, I have to disagree on this one. >> >> The reason to not call couch_db:get_design_docs/1 is to avoid reading >> the body of the documents, which is not needed. >> >> Plus, couch_db:get_design_docs/1 skips deleted documents, which will >> causes _changes rows to be skipped. >> > > maybe couch_db:get_design_docs could take some options to handle the > case. I think it's a good idea to use couch_db as abstraction to the > deep level. > > - benoit >
