On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 11:31 PM, Jan Lehnardt <[email protected]> wrote: > I really like your attempt to preserve this 1.x-ism for small clusters. > > I’m not sure I feel really good about this though, for the same reasons > that Robert K outlined. > > I’d be more comfortable in saying 2.0 does not have any config screen > in Fauxton and for 2.1 we figure out cluster-wide configuration and then > that gets a Fauxton UI. > > For our 2.0 messaging then, we could explain that the 1.x-ism compatibility > release is 2.1 (or whenever this can land), so that people migrating from > 1.x need to be aware of this limitation, or wait until 2.1.
I worry here that we'll generate a lot of talks by this like: - Hey! What have you done with web ui? How should I configure CouchDB now? - We removed Config from Fauxton as it doesn't fits well cluster environment. - But I don't need a cluster and bag of problems it brings on! - Sorry, 2.0 is not friendly for simple setups... But still being able to just read per-node config via Fauxton is a good idea. And even for clusters, it makes a sense: it gives the way to put some specific node into maintenance mode right from Fauxton (while there is no any cluster management page). -- ,,,^..^,,,
