Thank you guys for making this poll, and for publishing the minutes and audio.
I've voted, and it would be really nice to have this (or other) list as a wish-list that couchdb users could continuously update. Alon On 16 April 2012 10:07, Mike Kimber <[email protected]> wrote: > Good on you for trying something different. I cast 100 votes and then > figured that was enough. If you want my top 5 then they are: > > 1. Chained Views > 2. Richer Map Reduce > 3. Simpler Query > 4. Performance (high update low query/read) i.e. incremental map reduce > 5. Documentation > > We use CouchDB fro analytic, hence the bias above :-) > > Keep up the good work > > Thanks > > Mike > > -----Original Message----- > From: Robert Newson [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: 14 April 2012 18:30 > To: [email protected] > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Help shape the future of CouchDB: your voice needed! > > The feedback on the mailing lists, IRC and twitter has been very > helpful, thanks everyone for the responses! > > I'm going to take this feedback and provide a condensed list of > features. I will write up each item on our wiki, then we'll reset the > poll so that more folks can vote knowledgeably on the features. I > suspect it'll be a couple of hours, so I'll post here when it's up. > > Thanks! > B. > > On 14 April 2012 17:30, Bob Dionne <[email protected]> wrote: > > I kind of agree, though I think voting is neat. I'd like to think most > of these features are influenced by experiences with users in addition to > internal refactoring concerns and so forth. > > > > It might help for everyone to see the list of features (here's a cleaned > up version I got from BobN) [1]. As Benoit suggests, we need to > sort/categorize them first before attaching priorities. > > > > One thing we might think of is the areas they might be grouped in, along > the line of teams as Jan suggested at the summit. > > > > I'm happy to maintain this list as we drill down into the specifics, > summarize email threads, and IRC chats. Some of these, .eg. moving metadata > out of the docs, could easily require a lot of detailed discussion as they > hit many areas of the code, so we should flesh out the details. > > > > It was great to meet everyone finally, I think we accomplished a whole > lot. Thanks to Cloudant, Bocoup, and others for hosting, beers, etc.. and a > big thanks to Sam Bisbee and Joan Touzet for detailed notes and general cat > herding. > > > > Bob > > > > [1] > https://github.com/bdionne/couchdb/blob/master/feature-list-from-summit.md > > > > > > On Apr 14, 2012, at 11:10 AM, Klaus Trainer wrote: > > > >> <DISCLAIMER> > >> I know CouchDB's internals to some degree and even contributed a few > >> bits to its codebase a while ago (and still follow its development to > >> some degree). However, I see myself primarily as a CouchDB user. I've > >> been using it successfully not only in my own pet projects, but also > >> together with a small team in a consulting project for a client. I do > >> have experience when it comes to explaining CouchDB's ideas, concepts, > >> and how it can be used in practice to both technical and non-technical > >> people. > >> </DISCLAIMER> > >> > >> > >> My initial reaction to this web page was very positive (hey, great to > >> have a collection of great new features that we can vote upon and > >> implement!). After voting and having had some sleep on it, I'm pretty > >> sure that it's not suitable, at least not in this way, though. The main > >> problem that I have with it is that I'm quite convinced that if we try > >> to implement the features corresponding to their score on the results > >> page (http://www.allourideas.org/couchdb2012/results?more=true), we > will > >> either fail executing for some reason, or (the worse case), succeed and > >> have given CouchDB a more catchy list of features instead of having it > >> made a better piece of software. Please let me explain the issues that > >> seem important to me. > >> > >> > >> The main problem with that survey is that it does neither ask nor answer > >> the questions that are actually important if we want to make CouchDB an > >> even better piece of software. I collected three main questions: > >> > >> 1. What problem, or rather what type of problems does that feature > >> solve? > >> > >> 2. What are the implications and tradeoffs for the different types of > >> stakeholders that the feature brings with it? > >> - For me as a CouchDB user, how will that feature affect me when I'm > >> using CouchDB? > >> - For me as a third-party developer, how will that feature affect my > >> work on CouchDB modules/plugins/tools? > >> - For me as a CouchDB core developer, how will that feature affect > >> my work on CouchDB? > >> - For me as as CouchDB package maintainer, how will that feature > >> affect my work on packaging/maintaining CouchDB? > >> - For me as as Sysadmin / CouchDB operator, how will that feature > >> affect me on operating CouchDB? > >> > >> 3. How is or how can an existing problem be solved without having the > >> feature implemented in CouchDB directly? (That is, are there > >> modules/plugins/tools available that help me solve that problem. If not, > >> how difficult would it be to create one?) > >> > >> > >> Furthermore, I've got one additional question that, although it likely > >> helps understanding a feature, however is not as important as the three > >> above: > >> > >> -> What are the reasons that the feature has not already been > >> implemented? > >> > >> This question is probably easier to answer when having a list of > >> potential answers, for instance: > >> > >> * Only very few users have that issue, and most users will likely never > >> have to deal with it. > >> * Most users are confronted with that issue at some time, but it's so > >> trivial to solve it without having the feature in CouchDB anyway. > >> * It's hard to implement because (although feasible) it's just so much > >> work. > >> * It's hard to implement because its highly complex and very uncertain > >> if it can be brought into CouchDB anyway. > >> * Although easy to implement or already implemented, it hasn't been > >> and/or won't be accepted by the CouchDB core developers for some reason. > >> > >> > >> On Fri, 2012-04-13 at 20:24 -0400, Joan Touzet wrote: > >>> Thanks to everyone who participated in the CouchDB summit in Boston > this > >>> week! In case you didn't know, the (25 pages!) of meeting minutes are > >>> available for review at http://s.apache.org/ndI . > >>> > >>> Here's where we need YOUR HELP. During the summit, the participants > >>> identified 38 key features we think are important for CouchDB's future. > >>> Please help us RANK these ideas by visiting our All Our Ideas page: > >>> > >>> http://www.allourideas.org/couchdb2012/ > >>> > >>> All Our Ideas is a free/open source solution for voting based on > >>> pairwise comparison - think Kittenwar - and is super easy to use. > >>> > >>> Please complete as many comparisons as you can; we'd like all the > >>> feedback we can get. We'd be thrilled if each of you did at least 100 > >>> comparisons. > >>> > >>> Thanks again for your help in determining the future of Apache CouchDB! > >>> > >> > > >
