couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jan Lehnardt <...@apache.org>
Subject Re: CouchDB Plugins First Draft
Date Thu, 01 Nov 2012 16:03:05 GMT

On Nov 1, 2012, at 16:53 , Bob Dionne <dionne@dionne-associates.com> wrote:

> 
> On Nov 1, 2012, at 7:53 AM, Jan Lehnardt <jan@apache.org> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> On Nov 1, 2012, at 11:01 , Bob Dionne <dionne@dionne-associates.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> Reminds me of my favorite book - "Sketches of an Elephant"
>>> 
>>> Jan, thanks for putting a stake in the ground, I've wanted to see this forever.
The proposal in my mind takes too much of a product management or marketing view (perhaps
knowingly). Here's how it will look the buttons one will push, etc..
>> 
>> Totally knowingly, intentional even.
> 
> in that case, good luck, that's a long expensive haul.
> 
>> 
>>> I think the "what" and "how it works" are important to decide on first, .eg.
@rnewson's suggestion for something like RabbitMQ. Reading the docs for that, the "what" is
much clearer. 
>> 
>> This seems contradictory to your previous statement
> 
>> My document started the "what" and "how it works" discussion just fine. Whatever
is unclear needs to be resolved *before* we jump into any implementation.
>> 
>> 
>>> Looking over the efforts to date, couchdb-lucene, and geocouch, these two are
quite different in terms of design, one is roughly loosely coupled, the other more native
(in the same VM).
>> 
>> Yup, we need to define how this fits into the plugin system. Maybe we never to something
like couchdb-lucene, maybe we do native plugins first, and external plugins later, or the
other way around. Thanks for making this more explicit, I will add this to the document.
>> 
>> 
>>> A plugin architecture, in my mind, should emerge from the code refactoring and
layout we're currently discussing.
>> 
>> I respectfully disagree. I would like to start from the user and work my way down.
What ever internal refactorings make sense to support the use-case, we will have to make.
I trust that we are smart enough to make this in a way that is favourable to the rest of the
code base.
> 
> I see, great. I think we have perhaps different interpretations of "user". Given the
current state of the code base I see the users as programmers trying to extend the existing
code in interesting ways. An architecture for plugins that emerges bottoms up from those attempts,
similar to how the couch_api_wrap and couch_index refactoring came about, is what I'm interested
in. Top down high level approaches rarely work in practice *except* where there are lots of
resources and control over the process, both of which are in short supply in open source efforts.

Yup, different POV, my users are people who program against CouchDB that might want additional
features that aren’t in core CouchDB. There are also plugin authors to which we need to
cater, and the things you bring up definitely fall in that bucket. I just want to start things
out from the end-user, that is all. We are on the same page.

Cheers
Jan
-- 




Mime
View raw message