couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dave Cottlehuber <>
Subject Re: Couchbase trademark issues
Date Thu, 15 Mar 2012 08:58:41 GMT
On 15 March 2012 04:42, Kurt Milam <> wrote:
> 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.
>>> >

Hi Kurt, Nick,

Once 1.2.0 is out the door cleaning docs/wiki up will be my top
priority for a while,
so it's great to have some direction on what's not working out there!
Bring it on..


View raw message