From dev-return-11541-apmail-couchdb-dev-archive=couchdb.apache.org@couchdb.apache.org Sun Aug 22 20:51:46 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-couchdb-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 82214 invoked from network); 22 Aug 2010 20:51:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by 140.211.11.9 with SMTP; 22 Aug 2010 20:51:46 -0000 Received: (qmail 95041 invoked by uid 500); 22 Aug 2010 20:51:45 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-couchdb-dev-archive@couchdb.apache.org Received: (qmail 94945 invoked by uid 500); 22 Aug 2010 20:51:45 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@couchdb.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@couchdb.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@couchdb.apache.org Received: (qmail 94937 invoked by uid 99); 22 Aug 2010 20:51:45 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 22 Aug 2010 20:51:45 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [217.72.192.221] (HELO fmmailgate01.web.de) (217.72.192.221) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 22 Aug 2010 20:51:22 +0000 Received: from smtp08.web.de ( [172.20.5.216]) by fmmailgate01.web.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C7C416684837 for ; Sun, 22 Aug 2010 22:51:02 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [84.154.31.95] (helo=[192.168.2.12]) by smtp08.web.de with asmtp (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (WEB.DE 4.110 #24) id 1OnHVO-0005Eg-00 for dev@couchdb.apache.org; Sun, 22 Aug 2010 22:51:02 +0200 Subject: Re: splitting the code in different apps or rewrite httpd layer From: Klaus Trainer To: dev@couchdb.apache.org In-Reply-To: References: <95D3E102-B5DF-4815-BC3C-628EE4AB4C19@dionne-associates.com> <4C6E67B6.3050509@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2010 22:51:00 +0200 Message-ID: <1282510260.14749.59.camel@devil> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.28.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: klaus.trainer@web.de X-Sender: klaus.trainer@web.de X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1+OFGJ1pWDs4mWcromD4tvlnbXzOtWdpMwxovvw UxuBdTGpIo9nWPMoqvkkLLES8XwODHitec07Cf3nLMyyiFBCl7 iUygxIcGlEJguTrytpaw== X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org > It seems that noone except us is interrestted in that ;) I'm indeed very interested in that. However, as I won't be able to contribute much to the refactoring, I didn't feel like having to say something in this regard. So, nonetheless, here are my two cents. Recently, I've spent a few hours diving into the source code of riak and riak_core. In doing so, I got the impression that with regard to modularization and organizing the codebase around the abstractions, the Riak guys are one step ahead in respect of their codebase's evolution. Note that I've only looked at some parts of Riak's and CouchDB's codebase, respectively. Also note that at this point in time, my knowledge of both Riak's and CouchDB's codebase is still quite limited. Cheers, Klaus On Sun, 2010-08-22 at 20:37 +0200, Benoit Chesneau wrote: > On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 1:32 PM, Volker Mische wrote: > > +1 for a refactor. > > > > GeoCouch duplicates a lot of code. I tried to keep the names in as similar > > (though meaningful) to the original ones as possible to see where the > > duplicated code is. > > > > I would love to see that everyone who wants a new kind of indexer just need > > to provide the data structure and all the design document handling, updater > > (group) handling, list functions etc is done automatically. > > > > Cheers, > > Volker > > > It seems that noone except us is interrestted in that ;) Anyway I'm > thinking that in case of indexer it would be very useful to have a > generic way to add some kind of handler allowing any people to plug > its own stuff to the system indeed. > > Also refactoring would allow us to add comments to the code which > would help to review code. > > - benoit