On Nov 1, 2012, at 13:31 , Octavian Damiean <[email protected]> wrote:
> I'd propose a Futon.Next IRC meeting with all the people that care about > the topic. There we could gather a list of requirements, ideas and actually > discuss how we want to proceed. > > Discussing, tracking ideas, requirements and suggestions of such a topic > solely on the ML get a little tedious in my opinion. Aren’t these tracked at https://github.com/Futon/Futon.Next/issues?state=open for now? I’d suggest that IRC is as bad as a mailing list to manage these things :) > What are the opinions on a Futon.Next IRC meeting? I think we have a good foundation to move on with. I’m not sure how a meeting would help here. I’d rather not distract the people who work on this :) Cheers Jan -- > > On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 7:30 AM, Randall Leeds <[email protected]>wrote: > >> On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 10:35 AM, Ryan Ramage <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>>>> I'd assume that in a release we'd compile things down into the >> share/www >>>>> directory and serve out of there (as we do with the current futon, and >> will >>>>> do with the docs), so what we need IMHO is a build tool not a couchapp >> push >>>>> tool. >>>>> >>>> >>>> If Futon.Next should become a proper CouchApp as discussed then we >>>> certainly need a CouchApp push tool. >>> >>> One requirement out of Cloudant is the ability to turn things on and >>> off. This will require persistance. Have a db to persistant settings >>> would be a feature of using a couchapp. >> >> That's not how I read this requirement. My understanding was that >> Cloudant wanted the ability to turn off features at build >> configuration time. It would affect which js files get pushed. That >> means it would either effect which files grunt.js processes, or it >> would affect what files get listed in some couchapp manifest. >> >> If runtime configuration is necessary, that should be articulated more >> clearly as a requirement, but I worry that this starts to balloon into >> more of a CMS agree with Alexander that it starts to look like we've >> gone too far. >>
