On Jan 31, 2013, at 17:22 , Jan Lehnardt <jan@apache.org> wrote:
>
> On Jan 31, 2013, at 17:20 , Benoit Chesneau <bchesneau@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>> On IOS and Android there isn't any stable release of nodejs today which
>>> can
>>>> be problematic. It is easier with v8 now but this is another topic.
>>>
>>> But we agree that this is out of scope for now?
>>>
>>
>>
>> This is a policy we should define imo. Do we want to think to a
>> cross-platform solution today (desktop, mobile & other) and if yes we have
>> to make sure it works or will we have different solutions depending on the
>> platform. We can also just ignore that part and let it for the future with
>> the possibility to switch again. I have no strong opinion on that but that
>> something that should be decided imo.
>
> I’d say we make that policy once we have the code. I’m totally in favour.
In addition, that’s why I like to see your rcouch improvements merged soon,
so we don’t get into these situations where CouchDB decides to do something
that breaks future compat with rcouch :)
Jan
--
>
> Best
> Jan
> --
>
>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>>>> Also the point is that nodejs isn't so widely deployed or already
>>>>> insyaled
>>>>>> that some say.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, I get that. But I contest that premise. The only thing that matters
>>>>> is whether Node is *available* on these systems.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Well not really. Some users have specific requirements for dependencies.
>>>> For example lot of centos/rhel users can't install anything coming
>>> outside
>>>> legal repos.
>>>
>>> Right, that’s why I am asking for a list of available node versions on
>>> these
>>> systems that we want to target with future versions of CouchDB.
>>>
>>> +1
>>
>>>
>>>> A
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> My requirements for a first try are:
>>>>
>>>> - sandboxing: no I/O accepted by default, no global variables, or
>>> functions
>>>> that leak content
>>>
>>> Cool, thanks.
>>>
>>>> - embed in our source code so we don't rely to external for that. and
>>> don't
>>>> ask to the user to check outside
>>>
>>> I think this one is debatable, but possible with Node (as opposed to SM).
>>> I’d file this for nice to have someday.
>>>
>>>
>>> yes just a short list while yiou were speaking about it. we indeed need to
>> have a concensus on that.
>
|