-1 Since the release of CouchDB 2.x, we noticed a lot of new users coming to Smileupps.com, where we provide 1.x support. Almost all our customers feel that 1.x is very reliable and very simple to get their job done. On the contrary 2.x is perceived as heavy, buggy, and not production ready. I report here some thoughts directly reported from Smileupps customers:
- CouchDB 2 has lot of bugs and open issues, not felt suitable for production - Too difficult to migrate - Interested in having simple Couch on a single node - 2 is too slow in single node configuration - Interested in 1.x couchapps and _changes >From our experience, developers are much more interested in features decreasing their development time and easing their daily work( Futon UI / design docs / rewrites ), instead of system features, like clustering, which can eventually be obtained in other functionally similar ways at higher or lower levels. I'm quite sure that deprecating 1.x will leave thousands of Couchdb users in a state of limbo withouth real alternatives felt as reliable. That would be definitely a reputation killer for the whole Couch project --Giovanni 2018-07-05 19:43 GMT+02:00 Alexander Shorin <kxe...@gmail.com>: > 1.x, you was good and we'll never forget you, but it's time to move > forward to better CouchDB future. > > +1, bury it! > -- > ,,,^..^,,, > > > On Wed, Jul 4, 2018 at 11:51 PM, Joan Touzet <woh...@apache.org> wrote: > > DISCLAIMER: This is a non-technical proposal to make a project decision. > > Per our Bylaws[1], this means that it should "normally be made with lazy > > consensus, or by the entire community using discussion-led > > consensus-building, and not through formal voting." However, since the > > intent is to make a significant policy change, this concrete proposal > > should be considered as a *lazy consensus* decision with a *7 day* > > timeframe (expiring on or about 2017-07-11, 23:59 UTC. Please give this > > thread your ample consideration. > > > > > > I would like to table[2] a proposal to terminate official Apache support > > for CouchDB 1.x. This means that: > > > > 1. The Apache CouchDB project will no longer make new 1.x releases. > > 2. All remaining 1.x issues in JIRA and GH Issues will be closed. > > 3. Everyone can continue to use 1.x as long as they want. > > 4. People are welcome to continue discussing 1.x on the users@ list. > > > > > > The reason is simple: no one is maintaining the 1.x.x branches of > > CouchDB anymore. Issues stack up on the tracker[3] with no response. > > Original grand plans of back-porting 2.x features such as Mango to 1.x > > have not materialised. And when important security issues surface[4], > > having to patch 1.x as well as 2.x slows down the security team's > > ability to push releases quickly out the door. > > > > By focusing on what we do best - supporting 2.x and beyond with bug > > fixes, new features, and ever-improving documentation and web UI - we > > can improve our release cadence and avoid misleading our user base > > with false promises. > > > > > > THAT SAID: There are two important footnotes to the proposal. > > > > FIRST: If a group of interested maintainers start making active efforts > > to improve 1.x branch upkeep, I can speak with the full authority of the > > PMC to say that we'll endorse those efforts. But to un-mothball > > 1.x officially should require more than 1-2 people doing occasional > > bugfixing work. I'd personally want to see at least a 3-person team > > making sustained contributions to 1.x before re-activating official > > releases. Also, that work would need to be in-line with work currently > > happening on master; I wouldn't want to see new 1.x features materialise > > that don't have parallel commits to master. (Much preferred would be to > > see people fixing the things in 2.x that prevent people migrating off > > of 1.x instead.) > > > > SECOND: Let a thousand forks bloom. If you're looking to build a CouchDB > > 1.x fork that has baked in geo/full text search, Mango, Fauxton, and > > can run on VMS, OS/2 Warp 4, NeXTStep 3.x, and Palm, have at it. I'll > > even write a blog post about your project. (Sounds interesting!) > > > > > > Again, this proposal defaults to lazy consensus with a 7-day expiry > > period. CouchDB committers have binding "votes" on this proposal. > > > > Thanks for your consideration, > > Joan "to infinity, and beyond" Touzet > > > > > > [1] http://couchdb.apache.org/bylaws.html#decisions > > [2] In the non-U.S. sense of the word, i.e., meaning to begin > > consideration of a proposal. > > [3] https://s.apache.org/couchdb-1.x-issues > > [4] https://s.apache.org/wdnW >
