couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ted Leung <>
Subject Re: Transactional _bulk_docs
Date Thu, 05 Feb 2009 07:44:59 GMT
On Feb 4, 2009, at 11:36 PM, Chris Anderson wrote:

> On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 11:24 PM, Ted Leung <> wrote:
>> Yes, real time communication is useful, and is permitted, but the  
>> actual act
>> of making/finalizing the decision is to be done on the mailing  
>> lists and
>> recorded in the public mailing list archives.  The expected answer  
>> to Geir's
>> query is a mailing list archive url.    In this case, a message  
>> saying "we
>> discussed this in IRC, the major points pro/con were <pro>/<con>  
>> and we've
>> agreed to do <decision>.   You can see the full discussion at <url to
>> relevant IRC log>.", would suffice.
> It's hard to say when the full discussion would have taken place. The
> decision to make the CouchDB API invariant no matter the number of
> nodes supporting a database is basically what drew me to the project
> in the first place.
> I can't speak for the other committers, but I agree with the vision of
> CouchDB as database that can scale to any number of host nodes while
> presenting the same API to its clients.

I'm not questioning the actual decision itself.    It's the process  
that I am concerned about.   If this was decided during the time that  
CouchDB was at Apache, then we (speaking as an ASF member) expect that  
project to make decisions in the same way that every other Apache  
project makes its decisions.     I thought that this was clear when I  
recommended CouchDB for graduation.   I'm a little unhappy that we're  
needing a review here.

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message