couchdb-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Antony Blakey <>
Subject Re: Changing rev to _rev in view results (Was: Re: newbie question #1)
Date Fri, 02 Jan 2009 05:33:50 GMT

On 02/01/2009, at 2:17 PM, Noah Slater wrote:

> I appreciate you're frustrated with the current situation Antony,  
> but I think
> it's unfair for you to be claiming any kind of consensus without a  
> vote.

That post wasn't meant to be a criticism. Apologies if it felt like it  

There isn't a clear consensus in this thread, which to my mind  
reflects the fact that there are trade-offs that don't have objective  
evaluation measures.

I fully support the idea that a product should reflect the vision and  
opinion of a very small group. Abstracting from my preference for a  
more robustly theoretical approach to API desig, the holistically best  
result is likely to arise from this model. So I don't e.g. mean  
'gatekeeper' in a negative way.

> I would
> be interested in seeing a patch, explanation, and vote. I've already  
> expressed
> my agreement with many of the points you've raised, and I'm not the  
> only one.

I was only referring to a lack of expressed support for a fully  
reflexive model.

It's never been clear to me that there is a process for voting - the  
decision making process within the commit group seems opaque.

> It's pretty pointless for us to keep sending emails over proposed  
> changes to the
> code without actually seeing the changes.

I think a change to the API could be decided without reference to the  
code implementing that change. In fact, IMO the API *should* be  
considered separately from the code implementing that change.  
Otherwise APIs will tend to be decided not on the basis of design, but  
on the amount of effort some person is prepared to spend to  
demonstrate it, and hence code inertia, often resulting in expedient  
solutions. This means that good, but expensive ideas, can be lost.

The models under discussion have evolved from simple name identity by  
using '_id' and '_rev' everywhere, to a '_meta' wrapper, to Geir's  
fully reflexive model.

So I'd prefer to get buy-in to a model or principles, at which point  
anyone could implement it. That's what I tried to do with the change  
to the FS layout to support i18n, the committable implementation of  
which is my focus right now.

Antony Blakey
CTO, Linkuistics Pty Ltd
Ph: 0438 840 787

The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a  
faithful servant. We have created a society that honours the servant  
and has forgotten the gift.
   -- Albert Einstein

View raw message