On 08 Dec 2013, at 16:17 , Andy Wenk <[email protected]> wrote: > On 6 December 2013 16:17, Jan Lehnardt <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 27 Nov 2013, at 09:37 , Andy Wenk <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On 26 November 2013 17:10, Benjamin Young <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> This is a nit...maybe...but can we be sure that `_utils/fauxton` and > >> `_utils/fauxton/` both work? :) > >> > >> Would prevent "rock in shoe" sort of frustrations. :) > >> > > > > true :) but that would mean you are not allowed to create a database named > > fauxton which would be requested via _utils/fauxton/ > > > > This has already been discussed on IRC and the "solution" was imo more or > > less to wait till fauxton will replace futon. Then you will call it via > > well known _utils/. > > There are no discussions on IRC that are binding. If any of this happens, > please make sure that dev@ is informed. This is important to ensure > transparency of the development process/ > > Jan, thanks for pointing me to this. > > I don’t see why `/_utils/fauxton/` would collide with a database called > `fauxton` as that would live at `/_fauxton`, but I might be missing something > subtle. > > I don't get the point here. When calling a database called fauxton, the API > call would be sth. like /fauxton/all_docs . Wouldn't that collide with > /fauxton as the Webinterface?
Yes, but the URL is `/_utils/fauxton/`, isn’t it? Best Jan -- > > Cheers > > Andy > > -- > Andy Wenk > Hamburg - Germany > RockIt! > > http://www.couchdb-buch.de > http://www.pg-praxisbuch.de > > GPG fingerprint: C044 8322 9E12 1483 4FEC 9452 B65D 6BE3 9ED3 9588
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
