couchdb-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stephen Bartell <snbart...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: commonjs in validation docs
Date Mon, 03 Jun 2013 07:50:56 GMT
No worries!  I can make a pull request with something that makes more sense.

So then am I out of luck when it comes to requires in my validation docs?  I don't see how
else to get them in there.


On Jun 3, 2013, at 12:37 AM, Alexander Shorin <kxepal@gmail.com> wrote:

> Nice found Stephen! Indeed, this is a "bug" and my bad (:
> "validate_doc_update" field should be on the same level as "views"
> one.
> --
> ,,,^..^,,,
> 
> 
> On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 11:30 AM, Stephen Bartell <snbartell@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I thought it was strange too,  but thats from the docs (http://couchdb.readthedocs.org/en/latest/query-servers.html#commonjs-modules).
The way I interpret the example is "its ok to put validation docs inside the views field so
that you can have access to commonjs exports.".  This must just be a shitty example.
>> 
>> 
>> On Jun 3, 2013, at 12:21 AM, Aurélien Bénel <aurelien.benel@utt.fr> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Stephen,
>>> 
>>>> So I can't seem to get a validate_update_doc nested in a view field to work.
>>> 
>>> Why would you do that? Validations and views are completely different concepts.
>>> 
>>>> "views": {
>>>>     "validate_doc_update": "function(newdoc, olddoc, ctx, sec) {throw {forbidden:
'You shall not pass.'}}" // this one doesn't work
>>> 
>>> If you write this, `validate_doc_update` will be just a view. I'm pretty sure
this is not what you want.
>>> As a view, it should have a map and could have a reduce function, but would have
nothing to do with validation.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> 
>>> Aurélien
>>> 
>> 


Mime
View raw message