On Tue, Jan 06, 2009 at 10:04:14AM +0100, Christopher Lenz wrote: > On 06.01.2009, at 03:36, Chris Anderson wrote: >> On Mon, Jan 5, 2009 at 2:06 PM, Christopher Lenz <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>> So, um, can we get this change backed out? >>> >> +1 on deleting the feature altogether. It's parallel code in places >> and doesn't provide any functionality. > > -0, personally I'd prefer just changing the name back to _temp_view.
Whoops, my previous vote of +1 was based on a misunderstanding. I do not think we should remove the feature altogether, and so: -1 for removing temporary views altogether +1 for backing out the rename changeset > How many such support requests do we get? This is really a matter of > understanding the very basics of CouchDB, so a simple RTFM is entirely > appropriate in such cases IMO. And maybe changing the tone of the > corresponding docs to more strongly and obviously discourage the use of > temp views in production code. Agreed. -- Noah Slater, http://tumbolia.org/nslater
