If this proposal means v3.x replicators can't replicate one-shot /
normal / non-continuous changes from 4.x+ endpoints, that sounds like a
big break in compatibility.
I'm -0.5, tending towards -1, but mostly because I'm having trouble
understanding if it's even possible - unless a proposal is
-1?
I've read over the thread and looked at the foundationdb docs, but I'm
not sure I understand something about the proposal. Given a client
that makes a `_all_docs?include_docs=true` or similar query on a
particular db and that db reaches enough data to always take longer to
work with than the
> I withdraw my vote until I can get a clearer view. Nick would you mind
re-stating?
Not at all! The longer version and other considerations was stated in
my last reply to the discussion thread so I assumed that was accepted
as a consensus since nobody replied arguing otherwise.
The vote is on the proposal text in the quote.
> On 9 Jan 2021, at 04:37, Nick V wrote:
>
> +1 for 1 through 3
>
> -1 for 4 as I think the exception should apply to normal change feeds as
> well, as described in the thread
>
> Cheers,
> -Nick
>
>> On Jan 8, 2021, at 17:12, Joan Touzet
