couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kurt Milam <>
Subject Re: Couchbase trademark issues
Date Thu, 15 Mar 2012 03:42:49 GMT
One more note and I'll shut my noob yapper...

Jan asked whether there was anything else Couchbase could do to help fix
the confusion, and this message is a response to that request.

I never saw - it was dead before I started researching CouchDB
seriously. I can tell you that the poorly-handled migration from couch.ioto adds to the general confusion around CouchDB. Have you guys
heard of 301 redirects? Anyone researching CouchDB is going to come across
blog posts, answers on StackOverflow, comments on blogs, etc., that link to URLs which no longer exist. You guys need to read up on 'cool
URLs'. I suspect that much of the content that used to be at URLs
is still online at URLs, but because Couchbase hasn't
bothered to 301 redirect from the old URLs to the new ones, the content is
practically unfindable. It took me forever to find Jan's blog articles on
filtered replication and security, part of his series on new features in
1.1.1. My google fu is reasonably strong, but these important articles
(important parts of the catalog of CouchDB documentation, imho), were
seriously buried in my search results.

In short, Couchbase is doing a disservice to itself, as well as to the
CouchDB community by not taking the migration from from - put someone on that... Set up the correct 301 redirects.
Fix broken links and images in blog posts. contains some
excellent CouchDB-related documentation. Do yourselves and the CouchDB
community a favor and fix

Best Regards,

Kurt Milam

On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 4:09 AM, Kurt Milam <> wrote:

> I'll pipe in as a relatively new CouchDB user, and someone who's spent a
> reasonable amount of time in both #couchdb and #couchbase over the past few
> weeks.
> Couchbase/CouchDB is confusing for newcomers. It was (and frankly, still
> is) confusing for me, and I have seen more than one person in #couchdb
> expressing confusion and even worried about whether the CouchDB ecosystem
> is stable enough to consider using Couch(x) for the data layer in serious
> software projects.
> I've been aware of CouchDB for at least a year now - the brand is
> well-known in certain circles. I've been aware of NoSQL and MongoDB for
> approximately just as long, but I'd never spent the time really looking
> closely at NoSQL solutions until a couple of months ago.
> At that time, I began seriously researching various NoSQL solutions for
> upcoming and ongoing projects. Frankly, the CouchDB ecosystem is the most
> confusing of all of the various NoSQL solutions I've researched - riak,
> mongodb. redis, among others. The documentation is spread out, disjointed
> and sometimes out of date. A number of articles and blog posts link to
> addresses that no longer exist (note to couchbase listeners:
> your move from to was, in my opinion, handled
> extremely poorly, with multitudes of dead links and a seriously broken blog
> that was obviously not migrated to the new system/domain with much care).
> As I began to research NoSQL solutions more closely, I can say that
> CouchDB was the brand with the most recognition for me, and was therefore
> one of the first solutions that I researched. I was leaning toward using
> CouchDB for a number of reasons - brand strength and a recommendation from
> another developer whose opinion I respect. I can tell you that at least in
> my experience, the decision to go with CouchDB over one of the other
> solutions took much longer than it would have, if CouchBase hadn't confused
> the issue, and if CouchDB's documentation had been in better order.
> In the end, I went with CouchDB primarily for the master-master
> replication, the various solutions for installing CouchDB on mobile
> devices, and CouchApps. To be concise, CouchDB was the correct solution for
> the projects we're currently working on, but it took a good deal of extra
> research (due to the confusion caused by CouchBase and the scattered state
> of CouchDB docs).
> In case you hadn't noticed, I disagree 100% with Bob Dionne's and Jason
> Smith's estimation, and I'd say that my assessment of the situation, as a
> new convert to CouchDB, is probably much more relevant than the estimation
> of two Couch(x) old hands.
> Couchbase is confusing for those just starting to research CouchDB, full
> stop.
> Best Regards,
> Kurt Milam
> On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 10:49 AM, Nick North <> wrote:
>> As a fairly new CouchDb user, I have been confused about the relationship
>> between CouchDb and Couchbase. For some while I was unsure whether the
>> Couchbase site might have a more recent version of CouchDb than the
>> CouchDb
>> site did, especially as it talked about a forthcoming version 2, while
>> CouchDb talked about version 1.1, and it contains API docs that are
>> perfectly usable as CouchDb documentation.
>> Jan Lehnardt's Looking for Apache CouchDb
>> <>page has done a lot to dispel that
>> confusion though. I don't think there is
>> any need for anyone to change product names, but the sort of information
>> on
>> that page helps a lot to make sure people go to the right place.
>> Nick
>> On 14 March 2012 09:35, Jason Smith <> wrote:
>> > On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 9:29 AM, Bob Dionne
>> > <> wrote:
>> > > Jan,
>> > >
>> > > Here's my two cents as a couchdb committer.
>> > >
>> > > I don't think you (Couchbase) need to do anything. My observation is
>> > that there has been more representation about end-user confusion than
>> there
>> > has been actual end-user confusion.
>> >
>> > Completely agree.
>> >

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