couchdb-marketing mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Johs Ensby <j...@b2w.com>
Subject Re: the future of couchapp
Date Fri, 08 May 2015 07:10:39 GMT
Giovanni,
I think it is unrealistic to make Couch apps part of the main story of CouchDB
The CouchDB story need to start with DB (ala “data where you need it”)
Then we should be looking for the “one more thing” kind of story (ala Steve Jobs’ nuggets at his keynotes) that top off the story about the DB.

The one-more-thing story would should not diminish are contradict the DB story.

I looked up Nolan Lawson’s (@nolanlawson) enthusiastic blog post from 2013 http://nolanlawson.com/2013/11/15/couchdb-doesnt-want-to-be-your-database-it-wants-to-be-your-web-site/ <http://nolanlawson.com/2013/11/15/couchdb-doesnt-want-to-be-your-database-it-wants-to-be-your-web-site/>
and pull som highlights from that:

========================

He quotes Chris Anderson (@jchris)
Because CouchDB is a web server, you can serve applications directly [to] the browser without any middle tier. When I’m feeling punchy, I like to call the traditional application server stack “extra code to make CouchDB uglier and slower.”

Nolan’s epiphany:
No wait, CouchDB is a miracle
See, here I was, using client-side Javascript to talk to Express to talk to Node to talk to Nano to talk to Couch, and at each step I was converting parameter names from underscores to camel case (or whatever my petty hangups are), all the while introducing bugs as I tried to make each layer fit nicely with the next one. And I had a working web server right in front of me! CouchDB! Why not just call it directly, you fool?! (I shout at myself in hindsight.)
[…]
CouchDB is the web done right
And in fact, CouchDB is better than HTTP, because CouchDB actually fulfills the promise of what RESTful services were supposed to be, instead of the kludges we’ve come to expect. Look! DELETE actually deletes things! POST isn’t just what you use when you need to send more data than a GET allows! And HEAD and PUT are actually useful, instead of just being trivia to impress your friends at dinner parties — “Oh, did you know that there are actually more HTTP commands than just GET and POST?” “Oh, how fascinating!”
[…]
CouchDB doesn’t want to be your database; it wants to be your web site.

[… and after reviewing the drawbacks his conclusion inlcudes:]
Despite these drawbacks, I still think CouchDB has a lot of potential to revolutionize the way people write webapps.

[...]
In short, CouchDB is an expression of an ideal, a fantastical tale of science fiction told by wide-eyed dreamers. And if 
there’s one truth about wide-eyed dreamers, it’s this: with hindsight, their predictions either seem delusional, or inevitable.

========================

The Couch app concept has not been developed for years, but still there are some of us that feel like Nolan did over 2 years ago.
Couch apps is not dead as a vision.
What I think we need to do is to focus on Nolan’s perspective; the simplicity-wins opportunity.
There are other perspectives that are exiting too, but they dont help to define what couch app should be:

Your Smileupps and Hoodie promote background deamons/workers. That is irrelevant to this discussion.
I have been using the same for messaging, image conversion and LinkedIn authentication and it would be great to have a standard for node.js based listening to _changes. This could be an ecosystem of subscription *services* like Mailgun and Postmark. Small teams could make a living out of specializing on one cloud service. A service-trigger feature could be one of the new features of Couch apps.
But we need to leave this out of the discussion for now.

We could also take the approach of promoting a new stack, go from LAMP, skip MEAN go straight to  C**N, but it is to far-fetched.

I think we need to take the enthusiasm of Nolan as of 2013 and come up with some clear design goals and a very limited set of features to add to CouchDB ddocs and focus on an in-browser tool (add features to Fauxton) that removes the need for new developers to learn git and build tools. That would be a great guick hack tool for any developer and a great entry level technology for a whole new generation of developers. Who knows what they would create before they need to pick their full stack and set up a professional tooling and team?

So let me end with a stab at the story again; this time with both docs and _changes in mind.

Of course you can used CouchDB in a multi-tier architecture with any stack of technologies you like.
But you can also create and deploy apps and web sites with CouchDB alone. 
A couch app provides a UI for your data and can trigger services that can do anything you want with the data.

Johs


> On 08 May 2015, at 08:04, Giovanni Lenzi <g.lenzi@smileupps.com> wrote:
> 
> Back on track..
> 
> the story for couchdb may be to start refering couchdb with a new term
> like: "web-app-db server", or engine if you prefer.. where its primary
> meaning is not "web application" and "db server" but instead: "web server",
> "app server" and "db server".. As Paul alread said, to me too this is the
> power of couchdb.
> 
> So the new term "web-app-db" may sound weird at first, but I think it's
> only a matter of telling the users what it is.
> 
> 
> 2015-05-07 18:31 GMT+02:00 Giovanni Lenzi <g.lenzi@smileupps.com>:
> 
>> just fyi... all started from this discussion, where I was trying to
>> propose a list of ideas to push couchdb marketing:
>> 
>> 
>> http://couchdb.markmail.org/search/?q=#query:%20list%3Aorg.apache.couchdb.marketing+page:8+mid:zaty7v63giukyykh+state:results
>> 
>> 
>> 2015-05-07 18:09 GMT+02:00 Miles Fidelman <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net>:
>> 
>>> originally posted to user@ - reposted here at Jan's request (slightly
>>> trimmed)
>>> 
>>> -------- Forwarded Message --------
>>> 
>>> Speaking as someone who writes proposals for a living, what I find
>>> confusing are terms that sound very clear - such as "retire CouchApps" -
>>> that require digging through lots of distributed materials to find
>>> clarification of what you really mean.
>>> 
>>> I.e., it's not "CouchApps" that are confusing - it's the verbiage that's
>>> confusing.
>>> 
>>> Personally, I'd like to see more language like:
>>> 
>>> CouchDB includes application server functionality, that supports both
>>> client-side and server side native applications, which we call CouchApps."
>>> or maybe,
>>> CouchApps are CouchDB's equivalent of Java applets and servelets.
>>> 
>>> I think those are pretty clear descriptions of CouchApps, at a
>>> conceptual level.  (If not, then maybe CouchApps really are confusing.)
>>> 
>>> Miles Fidelman
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Jan Lehnardt wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Funny how this proves my point about CouchApps being confusing. We can't
>>>> even talk about their future without talking past each other.
>>>> 
>>>> In addition, cherry-picking quotes from my emails won't help to clarify
>>>> things. I understand you *can* read a position of "let's remove CouchApps"
>>>> into what I wrote, by only if you selectively ignore some of the things I
>>>> also said. I don't think that is useful.
>>>> 
>>>> Please join marketing@ to join the uncut discussion there.
>>>> 
>>>> Best
>>>> Jan
>>>> --
>>>> 
>>>> Best
>>>> Jan
>>>> --
>>>> 
>>>>> On 07.05.2015, at 15:10, Harald Kisch <haraldkisch@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Sorry Jan, please don't take it personally but in your both emails you
>>>>> definitely claimed out, that couchapps does'nt fit in YOUR
>>>>> CouchDB-Story.
>>>>> 
>>>>> In
>>>>> 
>>>>> http://markmail.org/message/no3jfksdxjcgxz4d
>>>>> 
>>>>> you personally said:
>>>>> "Technically, that would have meant CouchApps had to grow a lot more
>>>>> and I
>>>>> realised quickly that CouchDB is not the right place to grow such a
>>>>> thing."
>>>>> 
>>>>> Sorry but for me it means you don't want CouchDB to have an App-Engine
>>>>> inside. The only confusion is: What could be the issue for that? Every
>>>>> database vendor works for decades on it? And why peer-to-peer should be
>>>>> bad? Think on Git, torrent network, etc. pp. are these projects not the
>>>>> leading inventions of the last decades based on peer-to-peer? And yes,
>>>>> CouchDB is NOW extremely powerful with Apps executed out of its database
>>>>> core and replicated anywhere without the need of permanent internet
>>>>> connection!
>>>>> 
>>>>> Also in
>>>>> 
>>>>> http://markmail.org/message/xla3hulea4lo5duw
>>>>> 
>>>>> you personally said:
>>>>> "figure out a plan to retire “CouchApp”"
>>>>> 
>>>>> Sorry this words are not misunderstandable for me. And I am wondering
>>>>> why
>>>>> and how you can say that. And if you really want to "retire CouchApp"
>>>>> because of confusions (for me it is the other way around - the storage
>>>>> is
>>>>> part of the App-Engine because stupid containers you can find everywhere
>>>>> based on node.js etc. to support the same as CouchDB's native App
>>>>> Core-Feature called Couchapp)
>>>>> 
>>>>> CouchApps for me "are" the CouchDB Story. There is no confusion about
>>>>> that.
>>>>> Please do not claim that somone has something against you and please
>>>>> take
>>>>> it objective not emotional. But if you take such desruptive things into
>>>>> the
>>>>> community, you should also stand for it to explain them accordingly and
>>>>> not
>>>>> start to change the basics to loose all the current users of that
>>>>> game-changing core-feature.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Best
>>>>> Harald
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 1:14 PM, Jan Lehnardt <jan@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I never said CouchApps should be removed. Can everybody please stop
>>>>>> refuting a point that I never made. And lay off the personal attacks
>>>>>> while
>>>>>> you are at it.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Best
>>>>>> Jan
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 07.05.2015, at 11:16, Harald Kisch <haraldkisch@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Sorry guys, my eyes dont believe what they see..
>>>>>>> @Jan: How are you? long time not spoken to eachother. How is Lena?
>>>>>>> What
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> she
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> is thinking about couchapps?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Why not to make a list of pros and cons for couchapps?
>>>>>>> Did you ask jchris about removing couchapps?
>>>>>>> Or why you don't directly ask Damien aboout the cause he implements
>>>>>>> it?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> What is your benefit removing it?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> For my part I have been successfully using it since 2008 and this is
>>>>>>> my
>>>>>>> favorite use case for building secure, anywhere applications for the
>>>>>>> industry and I would apreciate improvements on couchapps regarding
>>>>>>> Authentication, LDAP and Active Directory erlang modules like built in
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 2010
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> and never improved.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> We should not forget what CouchDB is all about. And for me the guys
>>>>>>> who
>>>>>>> claim out to remove couchapp simply forget the power Damien have
>>>>>>> built in
>>>>>>> and the power who made CouchDB proud to kick-off the no-sql area.
>>>>>>> Dont forget who Damien really is. He is one of the leading developers
>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>> Domino Notes aka Lotus Notes aka IBM Notes, registering 3 patents in
>>>>>>> USA
>>>>>>> for it. Because only older guys know it, Lotus Notes was the
>>>>>>> previously
>>>>>>> business standard groupware software for large scale companies before
>>>>>>> SAP
>>>>>>> was destroying it's reputations with the help of IBM (which wanted
>>>>>>> only
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> sell their DB2 Database). Everybody who was working with Lotus Notes
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> begun
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> to love it. Not so SAP-Users, they are hating their daily work with
>>>>>>> SAP
>>>>>>> because it simply don't work (complexity).
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Couchapp is not complex and still have the power lotus notes has.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Remember:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Damien has built CouchDB because "everybody was talking about it, and
>>>>>>> nobody did it", until Damien got it done with CouchDB.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> In my opinion, and there are much more people who think in this way,
>>>>>>> Couchapp is the most important and game-changing feature in CouchDB.
>>>>>>> But
>>>>>>> also most misunderstood and most criticised, partly because of the
>>>>>>> fear
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> it
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> creates amoung other database vendors who always want exactly this:
>>>>>>> Application execution directly out of the database core. Yes, exactly
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> this
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> is Couchapp! And it does it without CLR (Microsoft SQLSERVER) or JAVA
>>>>>>> (Oracle Forms) and its terribly complex architecture.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Please stop using CouchDB as stupid data container and think more
>>>>>>> about
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> it
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> as Web-Application-Engine!
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>>> Harald Kisch
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Given the importance of this topic: the future of couchapp... I'm
>>>>>>> moving
>>>>>>> this to the user@ mailing list.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> This should be definitely something @users should be involved in.. at
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> least
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> those interested in Couchapps.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> To recap:
>>>>>>> Jan: wants to remove Couchapp name and design doc functions because it
>>>>>>> finds them to be source of confusion
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> ermouth: pointed out Couchapps are not silver bullet but they cover
>>>>>>> many
>>>>>>> use cases and there are rooms for improvements
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> giovanni: pointed out many users and industries today are using
>>>>>>> couchapps
>>>>>>> successfully, withouth such this confusion between what couchdb is and
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> what
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> couchapps are, and they won't simply understand couchapps removal,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> leading
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> couchdb to a second-death. Moreover couchapps potential has increased
>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> lot
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> within the last months: now they are secure and has support for
>>>>>>> features
>>>>>>> like e-mail, sms, paypal/stripe integration, events scheduling.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> johs: pointed out couchapps are big recruiter for couchdb and they
>>>>>>> should
>>>>>>> not be dropped: a fadeout of "couchapp" name withouth any removal
>>>>>>> should
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> be
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> sufficient
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> andy: was not aware of the name confusion, and wanted to keep the name
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> What you all think about it?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 2015-05-05 22:35 GMT+02:00 Giovanni Lenzi <g.lenzi@smileupps.com>:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Agree with Andy.. why change a name of something that is born with
>>>>>>>> couchdb, lives in couchdb and runs only inside of it?
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Dropping name or removing it won't simply be understood by users and
>>>>>>>> industries already relying on it. imho negative impact could be very
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> high..
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> and I'm afraid this could really lead to a new second death for the
>>>>>>>> project, after the first one with the damien katz retirement issue...
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> all of the above can't be justified with only some naming conflicts,
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> even
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> considered that couchapp tools and also couchappy project have changed
>>>>>>>> their name just to prevent it
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> More than a naming confusion, i'm aware of a lack of clarification
>>>>>>>> about
>>>>>>>> what can and cannot be done, supported by facts, real examples and
>>>>>>>> eventually benchmarks
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Furthermore, so far on social networks I have seen more focus on what
>>>>>>>> cannot be done, instead of the contrary.. and I can well understand
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> users
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> can be afraid and confused by this.
>>>>>>>> Il giorno 05/mag/2015 20:33, "Andy Wenk" <andywenk@apache.org> ha
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> scritto:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 5 May 2015 at 18:44, Jan Lehnardt <jan@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> On 05 May 2015, at 18:37, Andy Wenk <andywenk@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> As often, here are many truths in all the replies. I see myself
>>>>>>>>>>> just
>>>>>>>>>>> jumping in from the side because I don't actually use CouchApps. I
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> have
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> full respect for people like Giovanni  who want to keep CouchApps
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 'alive'.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> So I think the plan Jan wrote done can work quite good also for
>>>>>>>>>>> me.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Here
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> are my comments:
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> On 5 May 2015 at 17:39, Jan Lehnardt <jan@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for bringing up naming and design docs!
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> There are a few angles here, that make it harder for me to think
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> about
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> this. I’ll try to spell it all out.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> Design Docs: The learning curve of design docs is really, really
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> steep
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> the usability is so bad, that we need third-party tools to work
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> around
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> this.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> When we met in Boston a couple of years ago, we agreed that we
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> should be
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> addressing this. Mango is the first concrete step into a future
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> where
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> CouchDB indexing is more of an API and less of a “compile JS into
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> JSON
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> into
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> a doc with a weird name”. I believe that this is the way forward.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> I think everything that is in a ddoc could equally be hidden
>>>>>>>>>>>> behind
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> an
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> API
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> like mango does. Under the hood, it’s still design docs, but the
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> interface
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> would be A LOT more friendly.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> With 2.0 and Mango I’d hope that 90% of our users don’t have to
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> touch
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> ddocs anymore for basic CouchDB querying. I’d love to extend this
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> document update validations and filters as well.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> (See, now this turns into a future-of-couchdb discussion, sorry
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> about
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> that).
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> With nice APIs for all core features, there’d be less need for a
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> tool
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> manages design docs.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> What CouchApps can *do* today, would, however, still be possible.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> Which brings me to naming.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> CouchApp is:
>>>>>>>>>>>> - a python tool
>>>>>>>>>>>> - a nodejs tool
>>>>>>>>>>>> - is implemented in the erlang tool erica
>>>>>>>>>>>> - is a concept of how to put a *very specific type of app* into
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> CouchDB
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> - a domain couchapp.com/.org
>>>>>>>>>>>> - a way to manage design documents (which have their own
>>>>>>>>>>>> problems,
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> see
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> above)
>>>>>>>>>>>> - the second thing people get to hear, when they ask about how
>>>>>>>>>>>> do I
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> query
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> CouchDB?
>>>>>>>>>>>> - a lose collection of features inside CouchDB that all have
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> problems:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> - rewrite: not flexible enough, web devs expect more options for
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> routing
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> - show/list/update/filter/validate: terrible performance
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> characteristics
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> - map/reduce views: complicated (yet powerful), mediocre
>>>>>>>>>>>> performance
>>>>>>>>>>>> characteristics
>>>>>>>>>>>> - an url slug in our documentation:
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://docs.couchdb.org/en/1.6.1/couchapp/
>>>>>>>>>>>> - this creates an unfortunate hierarchy, yes, all the things in
>>>>>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>>>> section are parts of the CouchApp idea, but e.g. doc update
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> validations
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> a valid concept even if you need nothing else from the CouchApp
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> idea.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> This is very very very very confusing and we need to clean it up.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> * * *
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> I very much sympathise with ermouth’s story-of-couchapp email.
>>>>>>>>>>>> I’ve
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> been
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> through similar steps and everyone I know who has taken CouchApps
>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> an
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> extreme (Caolan McMahon of Kanso, Dale Harvey of PouchDB, Gregor
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Martynus
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> of Hoodie, just to name a select few) all have similar stories.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> CouchApps
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> appear genius at first, until you try to build a wide range of
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> things
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> them.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> At this point, I’m no longer interested what neat things can be
>>>>>>>>>>>> done
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> CouchDB, but I want to make sure we polish the core features as
>>>>>>>>>>>> much
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> as
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> we
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> can so they are easy to understand and use and don’t bring
>>>>>>>>>>>> surprises
>>>>>>>>>>>> operationally.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> I don’t mean to kill the concept of CouchApps, but the situation
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> today
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> very damaging to our user-adoption rate. I’m more than happy to
>>>>>>>>>>>> keep
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> functionality around, because I see there is merit in having it.
>>>>>>>>>>>> But
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> *most*
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> CouchDB users I see, shouldn’t not be confused with whatever
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> “CouchApp”
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> means when they just want a database that replicates, when they
>>>>>>>>>>>> want
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> put
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> their data where they need it.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> So yeah, sorry, I don’t think this should be a recruiting vehicle
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> CouchDB.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> Here is a scenario that I can see working:
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. establish the idea of applications-in-couchdb as a standalone
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> project
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> (can be part of ASF CouchDB) with a name that doesn’t have “couch”
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> it.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> yes - but I don't understand why we can't keep the name CouchApp.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> My main point here is that “couchapp” is too overloaded as a term
>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>> really hard to change the meaning of, or reduce the meaning of to
>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>> one specific thing that we want it to be.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> And even *if* CouchApp could just mean “the concept of having apps
>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>> your CouchDB”, it’d still confuse those users, that think that’s
>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> only way to use CouchDB and they walk away.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> To be honest, I am not aware that it is such a big problem but as
>>>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> are
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> way more in contact with users, I take it for granted.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> I don’t think CouchApps 2.0 is going to help. Especially with
>>>>>>>>>> CouchDB
>>>>>>>>>> 2.0 coming up, I see even more confusion and less clarity.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> My thought was this: we celebrate both CouchDB 2.0 and CouchApp 2.0
>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>> hammer as long as needed on the point how we want CouchApps to be
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> seen. I
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> thought it's a great chance to clearly separate the two different
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> things
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> when CouchDB 2.0 is released. But I know it is tremendously difficult
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> achieve the wanted result communication wise. Maybe the task is too
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> heavy
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> but I can remember various projects that said "Since version x.y we
>>>>>>>>> decided
>>>>>>>>> to separate this and that from the main project". But I also admit
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> that I
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> also remember that it still was needed to clarify the situation
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> afterwards
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> for some folks ('Why is this not there anymore?' .... 'They dropped
>>>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 2.0' ... 'Ah ok - did not know').
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> We have that name and we have a domain for it.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> I mentioned diminishing returns, just because we invested in
>>>>>>>>>> something
>>>>>>>>>> that doesn’t mean it makes sense holding on to it for the future.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> sure not ;-). My intention is to keep it so that's the reason why I
>>>>>>>>> promote
>>>>>>>>> my idea sustained. But that's the point of view I have at the moment
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> don't insist on it. If we find the common consensus that we should
>>>>>>>>> let
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> term CouchApp die, that's ok with me.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> All the best
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Andy
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Thanks for your support on the other points.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Best
>>>>>>>>>> Jan
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> As I said before, we have to clarify
>>>>>>>>>>> extremely well what the project folks think about CouchApps. I
>>>>>>>>>>> could
>>>>>>>>>>> imagine to let Giovanni work on that page with our support.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 2. provide APIs for all design-doc-features, so we don’t need
>>>>>>>>>>>> extra
>>>>>>>>>>>> tooling with CouchDB (maybe a little bit like couchdb-cli that
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> rkowalski is
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> toying with, but we’d ship that with CouchDB)
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> yes
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 3. Turn all 1.x-level CouchApp features (shows, lists, updates,
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> vhosts,
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> rewrites) into a plugin (can be installed by default, and maybe
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> later
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> not).
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> The plugin then can evolve independently from CouchDB and
>>>>>>>>>>>> implement
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> e.g.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> more efficient list functions.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> yes
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 4. publicly celebrate the retirement of all things “CouchApp”
>>>>>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>>>>> pointers on couchapp.org/.com to where the things “CouchApps”
>>>>>>>>>>>> were
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> used
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> for are available now, without confusion.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> The story then is:
>>>>>>>>>>>> - In 1.x some parts of the CouchDB API were too complicated, we
>>>>>>>>>>>> had
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> have a tool for it.
>>>>>>>>>>>> - The tool also allowed to build standalone web applications that
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> solely
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> live in CouchDB.
>>>>>>>>>>>> - All this is now available elsewhere under these new names: X,
>>>>>>>>>>>> Y,
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Z.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> - R.I.P. CouchApps.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> I still don't understand why we have to bury CouchApp, but maybe
>>>>>>>>>>> I am
>>>>>>>>>>> missing some key thoughts here. Imho we could also tell:
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> - In 1.x some parts of the CouchDB API were too complicated, we
>>>>>>>>>>> had
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> have
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> a tool for it.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> - The tool also allowed to build standalone web applications that
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> solely
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> live in CouchDB called a CouchApp.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> - We realised that this approach was resulting in some problems
>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> decided
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> to move them out of CouchDB.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> - All this is now available as (e.g.) Plugins at couchapp.org
>>>>>>>>>>> and is
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> called
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> CouchApp 2.0
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> - We had a good idea, learned and decided that it is better to
>>>>>>>>>>> give
>>>>>>>>>>> CouchApps it's own environment
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> TL;DR; we learned form the first attempt and the result is a own
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> place
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> CouchApps. We have the name, we have the domain and what we need
>>>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>>> clarification (sorry for repeating myself).
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Andy
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> * * *
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> We have talked about focussing the CouchDB message and we agreed
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> replication and its ecosystem are the prime story to tell. I believe
>>>>>>>>>>>> CouchApps are a huge distraction from that story and we should
>>>>>>>>>>>> own
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> retire it.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> * * *
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> So far my thoughts. I realise people have invested a lot in
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> CouchApps (I
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> know I have for 5+ years), but we have to be looking out for
>>>>>>>>>>>> CouchDB
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> see where we run into diminishing returns. It took me more than
>>>>>>>>>>>> half
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> decade to learn that CouchApps harm CouchDB more than they help. We
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> as
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> project shouldn’t focus on what is technically neat/cool, but how
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> we
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> can
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> get more people to use our project because it fits their needs and
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> easily accessible. We have many other fronts to fight to get this
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> right,
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> but with CouchApps, we have a foot firmly on a break when it comes
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> making CouchDB more accessible.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> * * *
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> I know this is a lot to take in. Take your time. You might want
>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> refrain
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> from knee-jerk-replies of the “but but but CouchApps are cool…”
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> type. I
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> understand. I think they are cool too.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> Best
>>>>>>>>>>>> Jan
>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 05 May 2015, at 16:52, Johs Ensby <johs@b2w.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cudos to Giovanni for CouchApp enthusiasm
>>>>>>>>>>>>> and to Ermouth for harsh critisim
>>>>>>>>>>>>> to Jan and Andy for addressing the “story” level
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> In spite of its many shortcomings, I still believe couchApps
>>>>>>>>>>>>> could
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> be
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> the big recruiter for CouchDB.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The fact that you can make a design document, direct a vhost to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> its
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> _rewrite and there create your api for accessing multiple databases
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> various access levels and multiple design documents is awesome.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The main storytelling problem is the overselling as Ermouth
>>>>>>>>>>>>> points
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> out.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> The overselling starts with the name itself, it should not have
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> “app”
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> it.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The concept of a CouchDB app is wrong.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The “app” that a million young developers are waiting to create
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> lives
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> the client.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> They need to learn some CSS and a Javascript framework, and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> CouchDB
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> the only backend they will need until they find out that they need
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> more
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> addition to CouchDB.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> We should quit telling the story about CouchApps and start
>>>>>>>>>>>>> telling
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> story of design docs.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> CouchDB design documents are great.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> At least as long as we keep it simple.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Our quest should be for powerful simplicity.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Simplicity always win.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Johs
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 05 May 2015, at 11:49, Jan Lehnardt <jan@apache.org>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On 05 May 2015, at 11:08, Andy Wenk <andywenk@apache.org>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jan thanks for raising this important topic!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As I had been around and participated when JChris, Jan
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and others
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> started
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> CouchApps and Benoit took over the work, I am a bit sad,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> CouchApps
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> started to confuse people. And yes it is true, they are
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> limited
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> but
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> have
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> their place in the history of CouchDB. Far more, it can
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> easily be
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> seen
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> as
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the evolutionary basis for Hoodie and that is a good thing
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> imho.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> We should give CouchApps a place to live in the CouchDB
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ecosystem
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> (not
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> meant technically). So my proposal is to reactivate couchapp.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> write
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> one page with info about
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> * what CouchApps are
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> * how one can create one (links to doku)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> * what alternatives there are (kanso, hoodie ...)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Furthermore we should include a link on couchdb.org to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> couchapp.org.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> I think it would be wrong to leave people still in the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dark even
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> though
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> nowadays we think, CouchApps is not the way one should
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> create a
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> WebApp
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> based on CouchDB (and I don't think the approaches to create
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CouchApps
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> was
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> foolish Jan ;-)). It is our responsibility to clarify what
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CouchApps
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> and why one should move forward to sth. better. With
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> clarification
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> comes
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> clarity
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks Andy! — I’m all for the things you mention, once
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> we figure
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> out
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> how
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the CouchApps story fits into the larger CouchDB story without
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> confusing
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> anyone.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What’s your take on that? :)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> * * *
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also, I think we shouldn’t be afraid to make CouchApp’s
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> place in
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> CouchDB’s
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> history clear in terms of “This was an idea of its time.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Today, we
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> think
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> differently. RIP CouchApps”.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jan
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> All the best
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andy
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5 May 2015 at 10:54, Jan Lehnardt <jan@apache.org>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> It seems we have a separate discussion going on here,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> so I forked
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> thread.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I’ve seen these two sides ever since we invented
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CouchApps:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Pro:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - CouchApps are amazingly simple
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - CouchDB as an app server is a great idea, I don’t
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> need to run
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> any
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> other
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> infrastructure
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - this is the future of web development
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - couchapp* is a great tool to manage design docs
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (*or erica… etc.)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Con:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - the concept of compiling design docs is confusing
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - even when they get it, they are confused that they
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> need a third
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> party
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> tool called `couchapp` to do so, because the documentation
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> talks
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> about
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> building full apps in CouchDB, they have an external
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> app and just
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> want to
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> use CouchDB as a database, but couchapp is still the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tool they
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> need.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> - the tooling is poor
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - the tooling is all third-party
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - they can only cover a very limited use-case
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - CouchApps are the only way to use CouchDB
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I see a number of people being passionate about CouchApps
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and I
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> believe
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> their enthusiasm is warranted, CouchApps are a neat
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> idea.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> But I also see a greater number of people being confused
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> CouchApps
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> in turn by CouchDB.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That is not a good situation.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Let’s think about how (and if) we can fit the CouchApp
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> story
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> into a
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> coherent CouchDB story.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> A prerequisite for that is having a coherent CouchDB
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> story,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> which we
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> don’t
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> have fully finalised yet, but we have talked about
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> extensively,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> consensus is around the “Data where you need it”
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> narrative that
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> emphasises
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> replication between CouchDB instances and other projects
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> speak
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> replication protocol (especially PouchDB and TouchDB).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> How do CouchApps fit into that narrative?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> * * *
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (Personal view alert: this is just to give some more
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> background
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> on
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> my
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> own
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> position, this isn’t meant as a basis for discussion)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I’m personally conflicted. When we set out to develop
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CouchApps,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> we
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> thought we are inventing a new paradigm for how to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> build the web,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> everybody would follow us, because that would enable
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a true p2p
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> web.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> That
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn’t happen and probably was a little foolish of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> us :D
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Technically, that would have meant CouchApps had to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> grow a lot
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> more
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> and I
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> realised quickly that CouchDB is not the right place
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to grow
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> such a
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> thing.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> In addition, there are various fully fledged web frameworks
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> already
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> CouchApps could never really compete in terms of person-power
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> Giovanni Lenzi
>> www.smileupps.com
>> Smileupps Couchapps Store
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Giovanni Lenzi
> www.smileupps.com
> Smileupps Couchapps Store


Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message