incubator-couchdb-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mark Hahn <m...@hahnca.com>
Subject Re: Node.js client for CouchDB
Date Wed, 13 Jun 2012 17:59:34 GMT
The hard part is the jquery emulator.  I can send you a copy of both when I
get a chance.

On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 6:01 AM, Pulkit Singhal <pulkitsinghal@gmail.com>wrote:

> Hey Mark,
>
> Sorry for the confusion, instead of  jquery.couchdb.js, I meant did you
> ever open-source your modified version of it.
>
> On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 2:57 PM, Mark Hahn <mark@hahnca.com> wrote:
>
> > >  The code that you modularized, rewrote and purged sync from
> >
> > It's the jquery.couchdb.js library that is included in the couchdb
> > distribution.  It's not great code, but it is what futon uses.
> >
> > >  What do you mean here?  "no benefit in my code
> >
> > I discovered that because of security concerns I had to proxy db calls
> from
> > the browser through node.  Otherwise anyone could use the same library to
> > do anything they wanted to my couchdb.  If couchdb had a decent security
> > system this wouldn't be a problem.  Anyway, since I had to go through
> node
> > code anyway, it was cleaner to use nano from that code than to use my
> fake
> > jquery.  The proxy is a very small amount of clean code, thanks to nano's
> > simplicity.
> >
> > >  I'm not sure if nano is offering authN or https
> >
> > I wouldn't know.  I'm just using it on localhost.  I think one of the
> > advantages of couchdb is that it is easy to run a copy on every server
> and
> > use the replication to share data across servers.  So I always use
> > localhost.
> >
> > On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 12:13 PM, Pulkit Singhal <pulkitsinghal@gmail.com
> > >wrote:
> >
> > > Ahoy Mark! Thank you so much for validating that I'm not the 1st person
> > > ever who thought of reusing futon.
> > >
> > > Some follow-up Qs:
> > >
> > > 1) The code that you modularized, rewrote and purged sync from ...Is it
> > > available on GitHub or somewhere else in the open source community by
> any
> > > chance?
> > >
> > > 2) What do you mean here?
> > > "no benefit in my code to having the same code run both places"
> > >
> > > 3) I'm not sure if nano is offering authN or https so I'm still looking
> > > into that. I had started out rolling my own non-re-usable solution by
> > using
> > > Mikeal's request module but I wised up and am looking into Nano now.
> > Slowly
> > > but surely. Cradle's next, thanks to all the folk who pointed it out.
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Mark Hahn <mark@hahnca.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > > I find myself wondering why someone hasn't simply taken the
> > javascript
> > > > code that
> > > > runs Futon and dropped it into a node.js module?
> > > >
> > > > I did something like that.  I wrote a module that was a clone of
> jQuery
> > > > that just implemented the ajax with http.requests.  Then I made minor
> > > mods
> > > > to the jquery code supplied with futon to make it a module.   So I
> was
> > > able
> > > > to write DB code that ran on the server and client with no mods.
> > > >
> > > > I found 3 reasons to not do this ...
> > > >
> > > > 1) The futon driver used a sync ajax call which was impossible to
> > > implement
> > > > in node.  I had to rewrite some of the code.  The person at microsoft
> > who
> > > > decided to include an sync call should be shot, as well as the futon
> > > coder
> > > > who used it.
> > > >
> > > > 2) The futon driver used non-standard callback returns.  Different
> > > > callbacks were used for success and error.
> > > >
> > > > 3) I discovered there was no benefit in my code to having the same
> code
> > > run
> > > > both places.
> > > >
> > > > So I switched to nano.  I love nano. I'm using rpc's over socket.ioto
> > > get
> > > > db access from browser.
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

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