couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Chas Emerick <>
Subject Re: RFC: Releasing 1.2.0
Date Thu, 12 Jan 2012 10:33:05 GMT
Based on it would seem that you're right, though Couchbase
was obviously much improved.  IIRC, DBX had slightly wonky process control (though that may
or may not have just been an issue in the chrome), and the embedded log tail and webview seem
like they can be safely dispensed with IMO.

In any case, the DBX chrome is not a big deal; it's the binary distribution of couch itself
that is AFAIK.  Based on discussions in #couchdb, it seems that rcouch is apparently preferable
the source of an OS X binary compared to couchdbx-core (it's certainly far more up to date).

- Chas

On Jan 12, 2012, at 3:29 AM, Simon Metson wrote:

> What about "just" bringing couchdbx up to date? I assumed that's what the couchbase binary
was (though am very likely wrong). Might be simpler than starting afresh. Happy to test, and
might find time to give the code a refresh too. 
> On 12 Jan 2012, at 02:40, Chas Emerick <> wrote:
>> On Jan 11, 2012, at 5:26 PM, Noah Slater wrote:
>>> What would the OS X equivalent be? A GUI installer, or
>>> something like CouchDB X? Do we have any Cocoa developers willing to build
>>> and maintain a Mac OS X installer?
>> I can't say that I'm a Cocoa Developer per se, but this is something I want, and
have been tinkering around the edges of a Couchbase Single-style (i.e. a menubar item, default
[or any] browser for futon, logs in ~/Library/Logs via, etc) binary using rcouch
( for a binary.
>> That said, it seems that it's still an open question as to whether Couchbase Single
itself is being / will be contributed.  If that is a 'no', then I'll spike something in relatively
short order.
>> (Also, I'm totally green around here; not sure if that matters or not...)
>> - Chas

View raw message