couchdb-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Paul Joseph Davis <paul.joseph.da...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: couch returning text/plain for responses - is this correct ?
Date Sun, 02 Aug 2009 10:02:52 GMT




On Aug 2, 2009, at 5:55 AM, Nitin Borwankar <nitin@borwankar.com> wrote:

> Paul Joseph Davis wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Aug 2, 2009, at 4:53 AM, Nitin Borwankar <nitin@borwankar.com>  
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Paul Joseph Davis wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [...]
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Well, for jquery with couchdb I'd just point people at  
>>>> jquery.couch.js for most answers. Though that could be me being  
>>>> lazy. Feel free to add where you think is appropriate. The wiki  
>>>> is a wiki after all. :)
>>>>
>>>
>>> For people like me coming from a very rudimentary UI experience  
>>> level - a slower descent into the hel.. er I mean depths of   
>>> jquery is preferred :-).
>>> I love jQuery but the more advanced syntax is a steep curve for a  
>>> few days.
>>> I tried the jquery.couch.js approach first - but just the number  
>>> of concepts to be assimilated before I could get one thing done  
>>> were too much.
>>> The functional syntax takes some getting used to and just trying  
>>> to figure what scope I am in at each line of the code is mind  
>>> twisting.
>>>
>>> Most jQuery tutorials are focused on DOM manipulation whereas my  
>>> first interest is/was making calls to couch and getting json back  
>>> - this usually comes towards th end of a jQuery book and I'd like  
>>> to create a page or two of simple jQuery ajax in the context of  
>>> couch.
>>>
>>> Starting from a bare $.ajax call level is useful - the syntactic  
>>> sugar of jQuery is actually very useful - I just found it way too  
>>> much all at once to also assimilate the plug in concepts as well.
>>>
>>> Additionally getting the paths straightened out when adding your  
>>> own libs or using the internal ones is another thing.
>>>
>>> Perhaps a tutorial db that comes with couch and has a bunch of  
>>> sample docs, simplest to more complicated, with libs, attachments,  
>>> sample data would be useful.
>>>
>>> I remember when I was at Sybase ( it is still true ) they had a  
>>> "pubs" sample database that was installed with the server and was  
>>> useful in learning an in testing.  Sybase training classes were  
>>> based on the "pubs" database as well.  I know the test data base  
>>> is supposed to be similar but a testing environment is not always  
>>> conducive to learning for many people.  I'd like to float the idea  
>>> of a database with sample data, code and docs that can be  
>>> replicated from couch.io, or just comes with couch ( to save  
>>> couch.io the bandwidth charges ).
>>>
>>> In the meanwhile I can start something on the wiki - in my copious  
>>> spare time.
>>>
>>
>> I'm fairly I intrigued by the idea of a standard test database. At  
>> the moment all tests build up their required test data. There could  
>> be a couple issues in terms of mechanics but having a couple  
>> example databses that could be cloned or some such might end up  
>> making tests quite a bit more straight forward.
>>
>> Anyone else have thoughts?
>>
> Note I am NOT saying standard TEST database - although that is also  
> a good idea.
> I am saying a standard tutorial database with examples of good and  
> bad practice etc.  the needs of tutorial databases may intersect  
> with but are not identical to the needs of a testing database.  For  
> instance coverage is more important in a set of tests and tests are  
> necessarily atomic but clarity and ease of understanding of how to  
> compose concepts to build more featureful code is far more important  
> in a tutorial database.  A test database can be a starting point but  
> I suggest we need more than that.
>
> So both are needed and I would be somewhat disappointed if my  
> suggestion got taken to mean that there should be a standard test  
> database alone.
> Nothing against the test code,  but just sayin ......
>
> Nitin
>
>

Good point. A tutorial db could be hosted for replication, but a test  
db would need something local. I kinda assumed that they'd use the  
same mechanics but maybe not.

>
>>>
>>> Paul, thanks again for putting up with the noise while I stumbled  
>>> around the basement banging my head everywhere.
>>>
>>>
>>> Nitin
>>>
>>>
>>>> Paul
>>>>
>>>>>>> Nitin
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>

Mime
View raw message