Hi Jan, By `the hosting feature` I mean the rewrite rules and the vhost. Good to hear that is not going away.
- Martin On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 11:04 AM, Jan Lehnardt <[email protected]> wrote: > Not sure what you mean with `the hosing feature`, but attachments are not > going away. > > FWIW, I’d be in favour of having a modern CouchApp platform hooked into > CouchDB, but in the past 5 years we haven’t found anyone who’d be willing > to put in the work. > > Best > Jan > -- > > > On 27 Feb 2017, at 10:58, Martin Broerse <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Hi Jan, > > > > If we split thinking about CouchApp in the hosting part and the backend > > coding part it would not hurt our usage if we lose the coding part. The > > coding part we need on the backend like password resetmails and other > > scheduled tasks are not there so the coding part needs to be more > powerful > > before we can use it. We can solve this tasks with OpenWhisk so perhaps > > keep the hosting feature and lose the rest? > > > > The Ember guys at LinkedIn found it is faster to eval javascript loaded > as > > strings than loading the javascript from the backend. We have not tested > > this yet but if this is true we can perhaps bootstrap javascript apps > from > > strings hosted in CouchDB but we still need the CouchDB hosting part for > > the bootstrap code. > > > > So in the future we are for keeping the hosting and lose the rest. > > > > - Martin > > > > On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 9:18 AM, Jan Lehnardt <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> Hi Martin, > >> > >> thanks for your comment. > >> > >>> On 27 Feb 2017, at 07:52, Martin Broerse <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>> > >>> We use the hosting from couchapp for many projects via > >>> https://www.npmjs.com/package/ember-cli-deploy-couchdb so keep it in > >>> couchdb. To replace excel sheets in businesses it is super you don't > >> need a > >>> separate hosting stack. An example couchapp hosted only on Cloudant: > >>> https://bloggr.exmer.com > >> > >> Existing versions of CouchDB that support CouchApps aren’t going away, > >> and I’m sure Cloudant will keep things around for a while, too. > >> > >> This is about the future of CouchDB and the non-existent developer > >> time that is required to maintain these features as CouchDB evolves. > >> > >> Best > >> Jan > >> -- > >> > >> > >>> > >>> - Martin > >>> > >>> On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 6:40 PM, Jan Lehnardt <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>>> 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/ > >>>> > >>>> > >> > >> -- > >> Professional Support for Apache CouchDB: > >> https://neighbourhood.ie/couchdb-support/ > >> > >> > > -- > Professional Support for Apache CouchDB: > https://neighbourhood.ie/couchdb-support/ > >
