> On 05 May 2015, at 12:54, Giovanni Lenzi <[email protected]> wrote: > > I think it's a timing problem.. probably Couchapps were simply not mature > enough some years ago.. but nowadays their potential has increased a lot, > under every aspect. > > IMHO they are even one of the best way to implement granular server-side > security. > > - security: server-side read and write ACLS are a reality( > https://www.smileupps.com/couchapp-tutorial-chatty) > - filtered changes from RCouch will improve security even further > - probably, some minor tweaks to the rewriting engine module can easily > add ACL at view level, so improving performance on #3 > - ACL for _attachments is already possible. We have a tutorial scheduled > on that
How do you do per-doc or per-attachment ACL? Those are not core CouchDB features. > > - background events are a reality too and they enable Couchapps to perform > any kind of background REST events: > - send email, SMS, payments, scheduled backups.. and so on.. just by > interacting with the database > - all these jobs can eventually be packed into single-feature-ready > couchapps: e.g. "do you need stripe payments on your website?".. just > download the stripe couchapp! > - the daemon is opensource and implemented in node.js, > https://www.smileupps.com/couch-daemon-triggerjob ... but it would be great > ported to erlang > > I agree with ermouth a lot can still be done around tooling, performance > and scalability (do you think bigcouch can eventually help us on this > too?), but I think leaving Couchapps could be really a great error. > > > 2015-05-05 11:49 GMT+02:00 Jan Lehnardt <[email protected]>: > >> >>> On 05 May 2015, at 11:08, Andy Wenk <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Jan thanks for raising this important topic! >>> >>> As I had been around and participated when JChris, Jan and others started >>> CouchApps and Benoit took over the work, I am a bit sad, that CouchApps >>> started to confuse people. And yes it is true, they are limited but have >>> their place in the history of CouchDB. Far more, it can easily be seen as >>> the evolutionary basis for Hoodie and that is a good thing imho. >>> >>> We should give CouchApps a place to live in the CouchDB ecosystem (not >>> meant technically). So my proposal is to reactivate couchapp.org and >> write >>> one page with info about >>> >>> * what CouchApps are >>> * how one can create one (links to doku) >>> * what alternatives there are (kanso, hoodie ...) >>> >>> Furthermore we should include a link on couchdb.org to couchapp.org. >>> >>> I think it would be wrong to leave people still in the dark even though >>> nowadays we think, CouchApps is not the way one should create a WebApp >>> based on CouchDB (and I don't think the approaches to create CouchApps >> was >>> foolish Jan ;-)). It is our responsibility to clarify what CouchApps are >>> and why one should move forward to sth. better. With clarification comes >>> clarity >> >> Thanks Andy! — I’m all for the things you mention, once we figure out how >> the CouchApps story fits into the larger CouchDB story without confusing >> anyone. >> >> What’s your take on that? :) >> >> * * * >> >> Also, I think we shouldn’t be afraid to make CouchApp’s place in CouchDB’s >> history clear in terms of “This was an idea of its time. Today, we think >> differently. RIP CouchApps”. >> >> >> Best >> Jan >> -- >> >>> >>> All the best >>> >>> Andy >>> >>> >>> On 5 May 2015 at 10:54, Jan Lehnardt <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> It seems we have a separate discussion going on here, so I forked the >>>> thread. >>>> >>>> I’ve seen these two sides ever since we invented CouchApps: >>>> >>>> Pro: >>>> - CouchApps are amazingly simple >>>> - CouchDB as an app server is a great idea, I don’t need to run any >> other >>>> infrastructure >>>> - this is the future of web development >>>> - couchapp* is a great tool to manage design docs >>>> >>>> (*or erica… etc.) >>>> >>>> Con: >>>> - the concept of compiling design docs is confusing >>>> - even when they get it, they are confused that they need a third >> party >>>> tool called `couchapp` to do so, because the documentation talks about >>>> building full apps in CouchDB, they have an external app and just want >> to >>>> use CouchDB as a database, but couchapp is still the tool they need. >>>> - the tooling is poor >>>> - the tooling is all third-party >>>> - they can only cover a very limited use-case >>>> - CouchApps are the only way to use CouchDB >>>> >>>> >>>> I see a number of people being passionate about CouchApps and I believe >>>> their enthusiasm is warranted, CouchApps are a neat idea. >>>> >>>> But I also see a greater number of people being confused by CouchApps >> and >>>> in turn by CouchDB. >>>> >>>> That is not a good situation. >>>> >>>> Let’s think about how (and if) we can fit the CouchApp story into a >>>> coherent CouchDB story. >>>> >>>> A prerequisite for that is having a coherent CouchDB story, which we >> don’t >>>> have fully finalised yet, but we have talked about extensively, and the >>>> consensus is around the “Data where you need it” narrative that >> emphasises >>>> replication between CouchDB instances and other projects that speak the >>>> replication protocol (especially PouchDB and TouchDB). >>>> >>>> How do CouchApps fit into that narrative? >>>> >>>> >>>> * * * >>>> >>>> (Personal view alert: this is just to give some more background on my >> own >>>> position, this isn’t meant as a basis for discussion) >>>> >>>> I’m personally conflicted. When we set out to develop CouchApps, we >>>> thought we are inventing a new paradigm for how to build the web, and >>>> everybody would follow us, because that would enable a true p2p web. >> That >>>> didn’t happen and probably was a little foolish of us :D >>>> >>>> Technically, that would have meant CouchApps had to grow a lot more and >> I >>>> realised quickly that CouchDB is not the right place to grow such a >> thing. >>>> In addition, there are various fully fledged web frameworks already and >>>> CouchApps could never really compete in terms of person-power and >> attention. >>>> >>>> That all led me to re-evaluate the whole value proposition, when things >>>> like PouchDB came up and the browser became a decent application >>>> development platform. That whole thinking led to the creation of Hoodie >> ( >>>> http://hood.ie), which started out with the code name CANG (Couch Apps >>>> Next Generation), where we liked some of the core ideas of CouchApps, >> but >>>> wanted to address the limitations that would stifle their adoption. >> Hoodie >>>> embraces browser-to-server sync to allow fully offline apps, it allows >>>> all-javascript-all-json development on the front- and back-end. It uses >> the >>>> database-per-user and the _changes-feed-as-async-worker paradigms and >> it is >>>> all wrapped into a package that is *really* easy to understand and get >>>> started with. Hoodie, unlike CouchApps, does have a fighting chance of >>>> making CouchDB’s unique features (replication, _changes) available for a >>>> larger population and I’m infinitely excited about that. >>>> >>>> * * * >>>> >>>> All that doesn’t mean, however, that CouchApps don’t have their place, >> but >>>> again, I’m not sure where that place is and the place it currently has >>>> seems to negatively affect CouchDB, so I’d like for this list to think >> and >>>> talk about all that for a bit. >>>> >>>> How can we make it that CouchApps strengthen CouchDB and not weaken it >> by >>>> adding confusion? >>>> >>>> How do CouchApps fit into the CouchDB story? >>>> >>>> >>>> Best >>>> Jan >>>> -- >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> On 05 May 2015, at 08:45, ermouth <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> CouchDB-killing answers >>>>> >>>>> Well... When someone says couchapps is silver bullet – I say ‘No’ and I >>>> can >>>>> prove it. Couchapps have a lot, A LOT of problems, and some of them can >>>> not >>>>> be solved inside CouchDB. For example, try to implement ACL for >>>> attachments >>>>> or try to scale couchapp. You just can‘t do it in reasonable way. >>>>> >>>>> I know several engineers who tried out couchapps – and left CouchDB >>>>> forever. Not because CouchDB itself, but because couchapps. O‘Reilly >> said >>>>> it‘s a silver bullet, others said – and what we have? Sloppy and >>>>> hard-to-debug architecture, that does not scale, has no tooling and a >> lot >>>>> of security issues. >>>>> >>>>> You gonna solve architecture problems with positive posts? >>>>> >>>>> What I want to say – there is no need to lie and say couchapps are >> great. >>>>> Because they are not. >>>>> >>>>>> would you like to write down some of your positive:-)) experiences? >>>>> >>>>> http://ermouth.livejournal.com/tag/couchdb – sorry, Russian language. >>>>> >>>>> ermouth >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Professional Support for Apache CouchDB: >>>> http://www.neighbourhood.ie/couchdb-support/ >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Andy Wenk >>> Hamburg - Germany >>> RockIt! >>> >>> GPG fingerprint: C044 8322 9E12 1483 4FEC 9452 B65D 6BE3 9ED3 9588 >>> >>> https://people.apache.org/keys/committer/andywenk.asc >> >> -- >> Professional Support for Apache CouchDB: >> http://www.neighbourhood.ie/couchdb-support/ >> >> -- Professional Support for Apache CouchDB: http://www.neighbourhood.ie/couchdb-support/
