> I couldn't see any reason why the name was changed..? Because validate function stored at "validate_doc_update" field within ddoc, not "validate", so ddoc subcommand have to be same named. Leaving subcommand as "validate" would break backward compatibility in this case.
-- ,,,^..^,,, On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 1:02 PM, Samuel Williams <[email protected]> wrote: > I can't see why "validate" is a problem, I checked the patch which changed > the name: > > https://github.com/apache/couchdb/commit/ea3b1153e52ac1513da4d634eedefb05c261039c > > I couldn't see any reason why the name was changed..? > > Kind regards, > Samuel > > On 22 July 2012 20:52, Alexander Shorin <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi again(: No problems. >> >> On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 12:48 PM, Samuel Williams >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> > Regarding the "1" result, I'm surprised that it isn't 'true', since that >> > would seem far more logical and match the rest of the protocol, e.g. >> > 'reset', and various other commands. >> >> I suppose main decision was about how to easily understand what >> response received for what command, but I could be wrong there. >> >> > I'm not sure I understand the motivation behind going from "validate" to >> > "validate_doc_update" - was it renamed to avoid collisions with something >> > else? >> >> You just need once to take a look at how ddoc command been processed >> to figure "why so"(: >> https://github.com/apache/couchdb/blob/master/share/server/loop.js#L69 >> >> -- >> ,,,^..^,,, >> >> >> On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 12:48 PM, Samuel Williams >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> > Thanks again Alex, you are always so helpful - and the references you >> > provide are really great. >> > >> > Regarding the "1" result, I'm surprised that it isn't 'true', since that >> > would seem far more logical and match the rest of the protocol, e.g. >> > 'reset', and various other commands. >> > >> > I'm not sure I understand the motivation behind going from "validate" to >> > "validate_doc_update" - was it renamed to avoid collisions with something >> > else? >> > >> > On 22 July 2012 20:40, Alexander Shorin <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> >> Hi Samuel! >> >> >> >> > 1/ I'm wondering what are valid responses to validate_doc_update? The >> >> query >> >> > services I've seen return either a hash {forbidden: "message"} or 1 >> >> > >> >> > Can I return true rather than 1? Seems more logical.. >> >> >> >> You could, but this would be invalid output. See for details: >> >> >> >> >> https://github.com/apache/couchdb/blob/master/src/couchdb/couch_query_servers.erl#L230 >> >> >> >> >> >> > 2/ Why is the name "validate_doc_update" so verbose when compared with >> >> > "lists", "filters", etc? Why not just "validates"? >> >> >> >> Initially it was "validate" command, but since any ddoc subcommand is >> >> a ddoc field, it eventually renamed to validate_doc_update. >> >> See first commit about it: >> >> >> >> >> https://github.com/apache/couchdb/commit/9044fc0234ed65056f087a86c7c117922f2a2c75 >> >> >> >> -- >> >> ,,,^..^,,, >> >> >> >> >> >> On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 12:07 PM, Samuel Williams >> >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > Hi, >> >> > >> >> > 1/ I'm wondering what are valid responses to validate_doc_update? The >> >> query >> >> > services I've seen return either a hash {forbidden: "message"} or 1 >> >> > >> >> > Can I return true rather than 1? Seems more logical.. >> >> > >> >> > How do I report multiple failures? e.g. Title required, Author >> required. >> >> > >> >> > 2/ Why is the name "validate_doc_update" so verbose when compared with >> >> > "lists", "filters", etc? Why not just "validates"? >> >> > >> >> > Thanks, >> >> > Samuel >> >> >>
