couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Chris Anderson <>
Subject Re: Apache sub-projects
Date Fri, 14 Aug 2009 23:49:08 GMT
On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 4:32 PM, Noah Slater<> wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 04:11:59PM -0700, Chris Anderson wrote:
>> It's encouraging that even without explicit code to deal with
>> clusters, people have been able to run large reliable clusters.
>> CouchDB can only get better at clustering from here. I think it's
>> important that in the near-term, the practice of running a 100-node
>> CouchDB is well known and easy for people to boot up and run and get
>> comfortable with.
>> On the other hand, we're trying to compress the entire application
>> into a few MB so it can run in browsers and smartphones. It's
>> legitimate to want to deploy CouchDB in these environments as well. A
>> mobile phone has no need to run a hundred-node partitioned cluster of
>> CouchDBs. However, there's some awesome stuff it could do if it ran
>> the CouchDB we have now. I'm just trying to preserve that option.
> Sure, but I think your original wording polarised the goals of the project.
> Perhaps it would be sufficient to say that we want to build a system that is
> flexible enough to be deployed on anything from embedded devices, mobile phones,
> workstations, or massively distributed server clusters.
> And on that note, why would we want to keep lounge out of the core? I'm sure we
> have enough brains between us to figure out how to package our software so that
> it can shrink or expand based on the needs of the local sysadmin.

Well I guess I shouldn't have started calling it core. I think what we
have now is CouchDB, and it could do to be modularized. I see the
project of creating an Erlang Lounge to be a good way to modularize
CouchDB. Lounge is already a project with a community and users, and
is architecturally compatible. So the idea of bringing it in as a
sub-project makes sense, especially in light of what you're saying
about shrink and expand, and the Django idea that contrib modules
should be removable.

I'm probably just being polarizing in my wording because I'm exhausted
working up to the move to Berkeley.

Anyway, my goals with the whole sub-project thing are at least as much
about community as technology. It looks like we have the opportunity
to bring in some more people who really understand CouchDB, and at the
same time a parallel opportunity to structure our development in a way
that increases our flexibility and code quality, so I'm suggesting we
take it. It may not be 100% perfect from every conceivable angle, but
it seems like a general win-win.

Also, I'm totally open to calling Lounge / CouchApp / etc something
other than "sub-projects" but the sub-project seems like a known
entity in the Apache world, so perhaps it's the most relaxing option.


> Best,
> --
> Noah Slater,

Chris Anderson

View raw message