couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alexander Shorin <kxe...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Next release planning
Date Thu, 12 Dec 2013 16:52:58 GMT
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 8:41 PM, Benjamin Young <byoung@bigbluehat.com> wrote:
> On 12/6/13, 10:17 AM, Jan Lehnardt wrote:
>>
>> On 27 Nov 2013, at 09:37 , Andy Wenk <andy@nms.de> wrote:
>>
>>> On 26 November 2013 17:10, Benjamin Young <byoung@bigbluehat.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> This is a nit...maybe...but can we be sure that `_utils/fauxton` and
>>>> `_utils/fauxton/` both work? :)
>>>>
>>>> Would prevent "rock in shoe" sort of frustrations. :)
>>>>
>>> true :) but that would mean you are not allowed to create a database
>>> named
>>> fauxton which would be requested via _utils/fauxton/
>>>
>>> This has already been discussed on IRC and the "solution" was imo more or
>>> less to wait till fauxton will replace futon. Then you will call it via
>>> well known _utils/.
>>
>> There are no discussions on IRC that are binding. If any of this happens,
>> please make sure that dev@ is informed. This is important to ensure
>> transparency of the development process/
>>
>> I don’t see why `/_utils/fauxton/` would collide with a database called
>> `fauxton` as that would live at `/_fauxton`, but I might be missing
>> something
>> subtle.
>
>
> First, thanks for taking the rock out of the shoe, Jan. :D
>
> Second, why was /_utils/fauxton(/) chosen over /_fauxton?
>
> Was there a mailing list conversation about it?
>
> Seems adding that to a config (even now) would have been simpler than all
> the custom handling.

IIRC the motivation was to not create too much _magic resources, to
not confuse people even if Fauxton ships on right of experimental
feature.

--
,,,^..^,,,

Mime
View raw message