couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jan Lehnardt <...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [PROPOSAL] Officially deprecate CouchDB 1.x.
Date Fri, 06 Jul 2018 13:27:45 GMT


> On 6. Jul 2018, at 15:00, Giovanni Lenzi <g.lenzi@smileupps.com> wrote:
> 
> -1
> 
> Since the release of CouchDB 2.x, we noticed a lot of new users coming to
> Smileupps.com, where we provide 1.x support. Almost all our customers feel
> that 1.x is very reliable and very simple to get their job done. On the
> contrary 2.x is perceived as heavy, buggy, and not production ready. I
> report here some thoughts directly reported from Smileupps customers:
> 
> - CouchDB 2 has lot of bugs and open issues, not felt suitable for
> production
> - Too difficult to migrate
> - Interested in having simple Couch on a single node
> - 2 is too slow in single node configuration
> - Interested in 1.x  couchapps and _changes
> 
> From our experience, developers are much more interested in features
> decreasing their development time and easing their daily work( Futon UI /
> design docs / rewrites ), instead of system features, like clustering,
> which can eventually be obtained in other functionally similar ways at
> higher or lower levels.
> 
> I'm quite sure that deprecating 1.x will leave thousands of Couchdb users
> in a state of limbo withouth real alternatives felt as reliable. That would
> be definitely a reputation killer for the whole Couch project

Would you be up for making some of our resources available for maintaining
1.x?



> 
> 
> --Giovanni
> 
> 2018-07-05 19:43 GMT+02:00 Alexander Shorin <kxepal@gmail.com>:
> 
>> 1.x, you was good and we'll never forget you, but it's time to move
>> forward to better CouchDB future.
>> 
>> +1, bury it!
>> --
>> ,,,^..^,,,
>> 
>> 
>> On Wed, Jul 4, 2018 at 11:51 PM, Joan Touzet <wohali@apache.org> wrote:
>>> DISCLAIMER: This is a non-technical proposal to make a project decision.
>>> Per our Bylaws[1], this means that it should "normally be made with lazy
>>> consensus, or by the entire community using discussion-led
>>> consensus-building, and not through formal voting." However, since the
>>> intent is to make a significant policy change, this concrete proposal
>>> should be considered as a *lazy consensus* decision with a *7 day*
>>> timeframe (expiring on or about 2017-07-11, 23:59 UTC. Please give this
>>> thread your ample consideration.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> I would like to table[2] a proposal to terminate official Apache support
>>> for CouchDB 1.x. This means that:
>>> 
>>>  1. The Apache CouchDB project will no longer make new 1.x releases.
>>>  2. All remaining 1.x issues in JIRA and GH Issues will be closed.
>>>  3. Everyone can continue to use 1.x as long as they want.
>>>  4. People are welcome to continue discussing 1.x on the users@ list.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> The reason is simple: no one is maintaining the 1.x.x branches of
>>> CouchDB anymore. Issues stack up on the tracker[3] with no response.
>>> Original grand plans of back-porting 2.x features such as Mango to 1.x
>>> have not materialised. And when important security issues surface[4],
>>> having to patch 1.x as well as 2.x slows down the security team's
>>> ability to push releases quickly out the door.
>>> 
>>> By focusing on what we do best - supporting 2.x and beyond with bug
>>> fixes, new features, and ever-improving documentation and web UI - we
>>> can improve our release cadence and avoid misleading our user base
>>> with false promises.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> THAT SAID: There are two important footnotes to the proposal.
>>> 
>>> FIRST: If a group of interested maintainers start making active efforts
>>> to improve 1.x branch upkeep, I can speak with the full authority of the
>>> PMC to say that we'll endorse those efforts. But to un-mothball
>>> 1.x officially should require more than 1-2 people doing occasional
>>> bugfixing work. I'd personally want to see at least a 3-person team
>>> making sustained contributions to 1.x before re-activating official
>>> releases. Also, that work would need to be in-line with work currently
>>> happening on master; I wouldn't want to see new 1.x features materialise
>>> that don't have parallel commits to master. (Much preferred would be to
>>> see people fixing the things in 2.x that prevent people migrating off
>>> of 1.x instead.)
>>> 
>>> SECOND: Let a thousand forks bloom. If you're looking to build a CouchDB
>>> 1.x fork that has baked in geo/full text search, Mango, Fauxton, and
>>> can run on VMS, OS/2 Warp 4, NeXTStep 3.x, and Palm, have at it. I'll
>>> even write a blog post about your project. (Sounds interesting!)
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Again, this proposal defaults to lazy consensus with a 7-day expiry
>>> period. CouchDB committers have binding "votes" on this proposal.
>>> 
>>> Thanks for your consideration,
>>> Joan "to infinity, and beyond" Touzet
>>> 
>>> 
>>> [1] http://couchdb.apache.org/bylaws.html#decisions
>>> [2] In the non-U.S. sense of the word, i.e., meaning to begin
>>>    consideration of a proposal.
>>> [3] https://s.apache.org/couchdb-1.x-issues
>>> [4] https://s.apache.org/wdnW
>> 

-- 
Professional Support for Apache CouchDB:
https://neighbourhood.ie/couchdb-support/


Mime
View raw message