On Fri, Jul 6, 2018, 15:48 Jan Lehnardt <j...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > On 6. Jul 2018, at 15:27, Jan Lehnardt <j...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > > > >> On 6. Jul 2018, at 15:00, Giovanni Lenzi <g.le...@smileupps.com> wrote: > >> > >> -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 > > > > Would you be up for making some of our resources available for > maintaining > > 1.x? > > *your resources > > Apologies >
Just to have our pull requests rejected? No thanks, We learned something from the past. Just take what I said as a big and free survey to your users and their needs.. After that, you are free to develop what it makes you feel better > > > > > >> > >> > >> --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 > >>> > > > > -- > > Professional Support for Apache CouchDB: > > https://neighbourhood.ie/couchdb-support/ > > -- > Professional Support for Apache CouchDB: > https://neighbourhood.ie/couchdb-support/ > >
