On 09/03/2009, at 11:44 AM, Gianugo Rabellino wrote:
On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 1:58 AM, Antony Blakey
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 09/03/2009, at 11:14 AM, Chris Anderson wrote:
If one were to use couch_btree and mochiweb to make a JSON store
that
is very Couch-like but doesn't pass the CouchDB tests or replicate
with CouchDB nodes, I'd consider it to be a different product, and I
think it would be misleading to call it CouchDB.
This accords with our thinking. What would you say if it were
purely a
matter of the bulk-op semantics?
Whatever. I would opt for the safe side and stick to the Apache
license and its spirit. While you try and convince the community to
integrate $FEATURE, if you need it for your project, just do what you
need to do, release what you want to release and:
1. don't call it CouchDB, as the license won't allow you to do that
Gianugo,
This is an interesting situation falls outside the license, because
the feature in question is currently IN CouchDB, and will soon be
removed. I have a deployment that depends on it, so the simplest
solution is to freeze my CouchDB codebase pre-removal - hence my
question.
Antony Blakey
-------------
CTO, Linkuistics Pty Ltd
Ph: 0438 840 787
Did you hear about the Buddhist who refused Novocain during a root
canal?
His goal: transcend dental medication.
