On Jan 31, 2013, at 17:22 , Jan Lehnardt <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Jan 31, 2013, at 17:20 , Benoit Chesneau <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>> On IOS and Android there isn't any stable release of nodejs today which >>> can >>>> be problematic. It is easier with v8 now but this is another topic. >>> >>> But we agree that this is out of scope for now? >>> >> >> >> This is a policy we should define imo. Do we want to think to a >> cross-platform solution today (desktop, mobile & other) and if yes we have >> to make sure it works or will we have different solutions depending on the >> platform. We can also just ignore that part and let it for the future with >> the possibility to switch again. I have no strong opinion on that but that >> something that should be decided imo. > > I’d say we make that policy once we have the code. I’m totally in favour.
In addition, that’s why I like to see your rcouch improvements merged soon, so we don’t get into these situations where CouchDB decides to do something that breaks future compat with rcouch :) Jan -- > > Best > Jan > -- > > >> >> >>> >>>>>> Also the point is that nodejs isn't so widely deployed or already >>>>> insyaled >>>>>> that some say. >>>>> >>>>> Yes, I get that. But I contest that premise. The only thing that matters >>>>> is whether Node is *available* on these systems. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Well not really. Some users have specific requirements for dependencies. >>>> For example lot of centos/rhel users can't install anything coming >>> outside >>>> legal repos. >>> >>> Right, that’s why I am asking for a list of available node versions on >>> these >>> systems that we want to target with future versions of CouchDB. >>> >>> +1 >> >>> >>>> A >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> My requirements for a first try are: >>>> >>>> - sandboxing: no I/O accepted by default, no global variables, or >>> functions >>>> that leak content >>> >>> Cool, thanks. >>> >>>> - embed in our source code so we don't rely to external for that. and >>> don't >>>> ask to the user to check outside >>> >>> I think this one is debatable, but possible with Node (as opposed to SM). >>> I’d file this for nice to have someday. >>> >>> >>> yes just a short list while yiou were speaking about it. we indeed need to >> have a concensus on that. >
