Aurélien, I see that at least at some point you were subscribed and participating on the [email protected] mailing list. From the stated goal of the list (find a new technical foundation for CouchApp) and the lack of significant engagement (users and devs alike) there, it should have been clear where this is headed.
And just to reiterate: 1. CouchApp was an attempt to revolutionise web development as we know it. — It failed, in like 2011. 2. It was designed in a world before Node.js. Most folks who want to do JavaScript and CouchDB have moved on. 3. There are SEVERE technical limitations, most of which aren’t as bad as a view index generator, but VERY bad for anything OLTP (think CGI from 90s). 4. The features are unmaintained at this point, future refactorings might make the unavailable (e.g. in a http layer rewrite). The last significant work on the relevant code is 5-6 years in the past. 5.We invited the CouchApp community to step up and build a future-ready version of CouchApps, complete with a design direction and own mailing list.. Nobody stepped up, and at the end of the day, a project goes where developers can spend time. 6. and to be clear, we are talking about: 1. _show & _list 2. _update funs, 3. rewrites // for the time being, we’ll keep validate_doc_update and filter functions, but plan to replace them with per-doc access control and Mango schema enforcement. The idea of design docs, or attachments on documents are not going away. In terms of ease of building web apps: a Node.js process running next to CouchDB is only minimally more setup hassle and gives you: 1. The same baseline features, plus a lot more. 2. A simple app building model. 3. A RICH ecosystem of third party libraries. 4. WAAAAAAAY better performance and scalability. 5. A future for you to do just the things you are already doing without moving to another platform. Best Jan -- > On 25 Feb 2017, at 18:22, Aurélien Bénel <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Joan, > >> Your email is aggressive, and your apology is not accepted. > > > I didn’t want it to be. I beg you for your pardon then. > My frustration was real, but I can assure you that I am not an aggressive > person. > There would not have been any ambiguity in my mother language : > discussing technologies in a foreign language is one thing, expressing your > feelings is another. > >> This topic has been discussed to death on the mailing lists and I am not >> going to be pulled into a retread of this argument. >> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/couchdb-dev/201702.mbox/%3CB6DB98EC-42B1-4960-9E43-257F040238F1%40apache.org%3E > > I’m just a « user »… a very dedicated and passionated user (I’m in the top > 10% on StackOverflow about CouchDB and I taught CouchDB to more than 150 > french software engineers), but a user. That’s why I never subscribed to the > « dev » mailing list (or for a very short period of time). I now understand > that I should have, but it’s too late. > > My frustration is as high as has been my passion for six years for this > incredibly interesting project. > I respect the board decisions but now I will have a hard time finding money > (which is sparse in academic research) to move all of our software to a > different technology stack and arguments to explain to all of my > collaborators that I bet on a technology stack that got rapidly deprecated. > > Thank you for your understanding. > > > Best regards, > > Aurélien -- Professional Support for Apache CouchDB: https://neighbourhood.ie/couchdb-support/
