incubator-couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jan Lehnardt <...@apache.org>
Subject Re: dev@ for development discussions (Was: POST with _id)
Date Mon, 03 Aug 2009 21:42:47 GMT

On 3 Aug 2009, at 23:29, Paul Davis wrote:

> On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 5:23 PM, Jan Lehnardt<jan@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> On 3 Aug 2009, at 22:40, Paul Davis wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 3:41 PM, Jan Lehnardt<jan@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 3 Aug 2009, at 21:13, Paul Davis wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 2:27 PM, Jan Lehnardt<jan@apache.org>  
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 3 Aug 2009, at 20:19, Paul Davis wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 1:43 PM, Jan Lehnardt<jan@apache.org>
 
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 3 Aug 2009, at 19:37, Paul Davis wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Either way, perhaps we should poll the community and
see  
>>>>>>>>> what the
>>>>>>>>> general consensus would be for respecting an _id or _rev
in  
>>>>>>>>> the POST
>>>>>>>>> body?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> “Be strict in what you send, but generous in what you 

>>>>>>>> receive” — The
>>>>>>>> Internets
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>>>> Jan
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Does that mean I should write a patch to respect _id/_rev  
>>>>>>> members?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Oh sorry, I didn't mean to assign any patches :)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I remember stumbling over this at least twice in the (distant)  
>>>>>> past. I
>>>>>> prefer the forced PUT, but then I'm also the one to argue  
>>>>>> intuitive
>>>>>> APIs.
>>>>>> Considering no downsides (usually Damien adds or leaves out  
>>>>>> features
>>>>>> for
>>>>>> a
>>>>>> reason), I don't see anything wrong with Brian's proposal.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>> Jan
>>>>>> --
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Its on the white board. I'll send a proposal to user@ and see  
>>>>> what a
>>>>> more general audience thinks.
>>>>
>>>> Per ASF rules, user@ has no voice here :) But feel free to invite  
>>>> them
>>>> over
>>>> to dev@ :)
>>>>
>>>> Cheers
>>>> Jan
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>
>>> I thought §4.1.2 listed consultation with the project's user mailing
>>> list as a precondition for considering a matters ready for binding
>>> discussion in the event that any given argument lacked technical  
>>> merit
>>> to be immediately obvious in superiority.
>>
>> Sorry, just relaying what I've been beaten over the head with  
>> heavily :)
>>
>> Cheers
>> Jan
>> --
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> :) No worries. Just poking fun at rules.
>


§ 7.4.3: Don't fullquote.

Cheers
Jan
--
Mime
View raw message