couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Wendall Cada <>
Subject Re: Help shape the future of CouchDB: your voice needed!
Date Mon, 16 Apr 2012 15:01:29 GMT
On 04/15/2012 02:51 AM, Benoit Chesneau wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 8:01 AM, Tim McNamara
> <>  wrote:
>> One of the good reasons for this format (although I have no idea if it
>> is why it's why it was chosen) is that there are some good statistics
>> behind pairwise comparison.
> The main problem with that format is comparing apples with oranges.
> features should be compared at the same level of usage and eventually
> complexity not just because B come after A or a random has been
> applied.
> - benoƮt
I agree with Benoit here. Most of these comparisons had me scratching my 
head. These are largely not even apple/orange comparison, more like 
apple/rock comparisons. They have nothing whatsoever to do with each 
other. Also, lumping new feature X in with items that are really just 
broken and need fixed (re-factored) isn't really useful. All of the 
re-factoring needs done, and likely some of the new features. Many of 
the new features are likely trigger some of the other work identified 
anyhow. -1 on this as a useful voting format.


View raw message