Mailing-List: contact user-help@couchdb.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: user@couchdb.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of adam.kocoloski@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.128.172 as permitted sender)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.3 \(1503\))
Subject: Re: _rev or rev...? Did I see that right?
From: Adam Kocoloski <kocolosk@apache.org>
In-Reply-To: <1369947621.58634.YahooMailRC@web181703.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 14:01:15 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <3576BC73-E2DF-4D25-B9E9-78358F174502@apache.org>
References: <1369942020.94745.YahooMailRC@web181704.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
 <CABvT1DH0P=y349esxx69+oSZibQLkua9BF02D-Bzgkfspqa5Aw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CACrj35GHuQFu2ha6AHHd4iNbSeP3dvFxS+fwLrtpJhV+D_TFeg@mail.gmail.com>
 <1369947621.58634.YahooMailRC@web181703.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
To: user@couchdb.apache.org

It's a wart for sure.  I still get it wrong from time to time.

Adam

On May 30, 2013, at 5:00 PM, Scott Weber <scotty2541@sbcglobal.net> =
wrote:

> I concur with Mark that it would be a bummer.
>=20
> I understand the desire to remove potential conflicts of 'id' and =
'rev', which=20
> is probably why they were 'name mangled' in C-style.
>=20
> But if the PUT request used the same name mangling, the meta data =
would be=20
> consistently obtained.
>=20
> Every language has reserved words. Every developer/user needs to live =
with it.=20
> I'd just prefer that they were the same.
>=20
> -Scotty
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Mark Hahn <mark@hahnca.com>
> To: user@couchdb.apache.org
> Sent: Thu, May 30, 2013 3:01:47 PM
> Subject: Re: _rev or rev...? Did I see that right?
>=20
>> for a future version where couchdb's metadata is not intertwined with
> user data at all.
>=20
> That would be a bummer.  It is very convenient to just pass the doc =
around
> and use/set _id everywhere.  We'd have to carry around extra metadata.
>=20
> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 12:44 PM, Robert Newson <rnewson@apache.org> =
wrote:
>=20
>> It is confusing, but this is the designed behavior. _id and _rev are
>> used where they could conflict with user-specified properties, which
>> is basically whenever you're viewing a document. In other contexts,
>> like the JSON that CouchDB responds with to indicate success or
>> failure of a PUT request, it uses "id" and "rev".
>>=20
>> There's a ticket, COUCHDB-1725, for a future version where couchdb's
>> metadata is not intertwined with user data at all. With that work,
>> this kind of confusion can go away.
>>=20
>> B.
>>=20
>>=20
>> On 30 May 2013 20:27, Scott Weber <scotty2541@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>> Hi Gang,
>>>=20
>>> I notice that if I do a PUT, the reply has a key named "rev"
>>> But if I do a GET, the key is named "_rev"
>>>=20
>>> (In fact, this is a case for "id" as well )
>>>=20
>>> I know the key is stored in the document, and is meant to be auto
>> generated.
>>> However, why can't the "HTTP/1.1 201 Created" reply with the key =
"_rev",
>>> identical to what is in the document?
>>>=20
>>> The fact that there are two different key names for the same thing =
makes
>> code
>>> re-use and encapsulation a little more complex.
>>>=20
>>> Or am I missing something.
>>>=20
>>> -Scotty
>>>=20
>>=20
>=20