couchdb-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jens Alfke <>
Subject Re: Unexpected response for ?open_revs=all
Date Wed, 13 Jul 2011 17:32:25 GMT

On Jul 13, 2011, at 10:07 AM, Robert Newson wrote:

> It's clear that the wiki serves poorly as an official source of
> documentation. This is not surprising given that's not where their
> strengths lie.

Agreed in principle, but the API references pages on the wiki have been extremely useful to
me in both learning & coding. I find it a lot easier to learn from references like these
than from tutorials in books. I’m happy to give back (when appropriate) by fixing up the
wiki docs until they're superseded.

> There's an effort to create solid documentation that will form part of
> future releases. They will live under source control with the code
> base where we can make it part of our routine to ensure their accuracy
> over time.

Sounds good! How can I get involved, at least to the extent of reading what exists and reporting

Oh, and back to the topic at hand:

> The ?conflicts=true parameter should be used here instead.

I’m partial to ?open_revs because it returns the contents of all conflicting revisions in
one call, instead of requiring one or more extra GETs. Is there a way to make ?conflicts do
that too?


View raw message