incubator-couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Octavian Damiean <mainer...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Futon.Next
Date Thu, 01 Nov 2012 12:31:27 GMT
I'd propose a Futon.Next IRC meeting with all the people that care about
the topic. There we could gather a list of requirements, ideas and actually
discuss how we want to proceed.

Discussing, tracking ideas, requirements and suggestions of such a topic
solely on the ML get a little tedious in my opinion.

What are the opinions on a Futon.Next IRC meeting?

On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 7:30 AM, Randall Leeds <randall.leeds@gmail.com>wrote:

> On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 10:35 AM, Ryan Ramage <ryan.ramage@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>> I'd assume that in a release we'd compile things down into the
> share/www
> >>> directory and serve out of there (as we do with the current futon, and
> will
> >>> do with the docs), so what we need IMHO is a build tool not a couchapp
> push
> >>> tool.
> >>>
> >>
> >> If Futon.Next should become a proper CouchApp as discussed then we
> >> certainly need a CouchApp push tool.
> >
> > One requirement out of Cloudant is the ability to turn things on and
> > off. This will require persistance. Have a db to persistant settings
> > would be a feature of using a couchapp.
>
> That's not how I read this requirement. My understanding was that
> Cloudant wanted the ability to turn off features at build
> configuration time. It would affect which js files get pushed. That
> means it would either effect which files grunt.js processes, or it
> would affect what files get listed in some couchapp manifest.
>
> If runtime configuration is necessary, that should be articulated more
> clearly as a requirement, but I worry that this starts to balloon into
> more of a CMS agree with Alexander that it starts to look like we've
> gone too far.
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message