On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 3:33 PM, Benoit Chesneau <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 2:57 PM, Dirkjan Ochtman <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Sat, Sep 29, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Benoit Chesneau <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> Voilà, hopefully this thread can be a good start for merging rcouch, >>> bigcouch & apache couchdb and will ease merge of the other features imo. >> >> As a distributor, the most important deficiency in today's release >> tarballs is the fact that pretty much all the dependencies are >> bundled, with no convenient way to use system copies. IMO this should >> be done especially for C libraries like snappy and spidermonkey, but >> preferably also for the Erlang parts with an alive upstream. I haven't >> tracked it to closely, but I always get the impression that CouchDB >> just vendors upstream and isn't that good about making sure patches >> end up upstream as well (and tracking what versions correspond to the >> dependencies shipped with a given CouchDB tarball). > > > Not sure what you mean. spidermonkey is choosed on the system while > snappy is build statically if it's what you mean. My proposal for > package maintainer is to use the autotools for that. Which would solve > all of their needs. The autootols here would detect or use the path > choosen by the package maintainer. While we keep the possibility to > build static releases. > > About upstream version, I don't think it's really a problem. We > shouldn't stop ourself to improve couchdb just because a distributions > is slow to upgrade to latest stable release. Which doesn't mean we > should always choose an upstream version. It should be choosed because > it will improve the user experience. > > > - benoît
s/choosed/choosen
