Re: Fauxton Windows developer question

2015-10-26 Thread Sebastian Rothbucher
Hi,

if it was me, I'd avoid plain makefiles, too. At least for fauxton. What
about sticking with Grunt? We could still do some work to brush up the
Gruntfile. And with a few tweaks, it's portable, even on Win (in fact: I
found another one this WE).

Best
Sebastian

On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 6:03 PM, Joan Touzet  wrote:

> Hi Robert,
>
> I'm presently migrating our one Makefile left in couchdb to a Windows
> NMakefile, which uses a different syntax.
>
> git shell works but has enough problems that I don't want to rely on
> it. Sometimes it's almost as much work to debug a GNU Makefile running
> under cygwin as it is to rewrite the entire Makefile as an NMakefile.
>
> It'd be super swell if you could avoid a GNU Makefile.
>
> -Joan
>
> - Original Message -
> > From: "Robert Kowalski" 
> > To: dev@couchdb.apache.org
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2015 10:12:17 AM
> > Subject: Fauxton Windows developer question
> >
> > Hey there,
> >
> > I am currently working with our old & grown Gruntfile.js [1] together
> > with
> > the files in tasks/
> >
> > The gruntfile has grown over the years and it got really hard to make
> > changes to our buildsystem.
> >
> > It also has some weird edge cases, as a release is made from the
> > dist/debug
> > folder, but the debug folder and it's contents is created from the
> > task
> > that spins up the devserver.
> >
> > Anyway... right now I am trying to integrate Babel as react-tools are
> > deprecated. After the update I want to update to React 14 (that's
> > where my
> > current journey began).
> >
> > There are some tasks that would perfectly fit into a Makefile because
> > they
> > don't fit in a one liner as `npm run ` [2] (e.g. finding all
> > .less
> > files and feed them into the less compiler). I know that some people
> > are
> > using Windows and I am a super Windows noob.
> >
> > Windows Fauxton developers:
> >
> > Do Makefiles run in your Windows dev environment (e.g. via git shell
> > et.
> > al.) or would a make based build for Fauxton exclude you?
> >
> > If it would exclude you, do you have a suggestion what to use?
> >
> > Best,
> > Robert :)
> >
> >
> > [1]
> > https://github.com/apache/couchdb-fauxton/blob/master/Gruntfile.js
> > [2]
> > https://github.com/apache/couchdb-fauxton/blob/master/package.json#L50
> >
>


[PROPOSAL] CouchApp Work Group

2015-10-26 Thread Alexander Shorin
Hi everyone.

Recently we had quite hot discussions around CouchApps feature: what
the future it has, what the problems it has, what the plans people
have on it and so on, but basically we have a lot of talks, but only.
However, these discussions showed that we have quite enough people in
our community who loves that feature, who wishes it to become better
and who wanted to make it better.

While CouchDB Team has no enough resources to completely support this
feature and improve it, I propose to create CouchApp Work Group (CAWG)
which will be organized by active CouchApp activists and people who
would like to work on it and provide support of any kind that can.


=== What CAWG will do?

- Restore good name of CouchApp and couchapp.org website;
- Search for solutions of technical and ideological issues;
- Provide informational and technical support;
- Involve more people into CouchDB ecosystem;
- Provide feedback to CouchDB dev team for the existed features that
CouchApps counts vital, proposals and, I wish, pull requests for new
features and improvements;

As was previously wisely noticed, CouchApp is a metafeature that based
on top of CouchDB, but it tightly coupled with CouchDB and we cannot
ignore it existence nor try to bury history of our project.


=== How CAWG will interact with core devs?

There were asked some concerns that CouchDB devs cannot maintains
CouchApp related requests now, work on new features and so on, and so
on, so all the new feature requests discussion almost always ended
with the same resolution.

Accounting past experience, I propose the following format: CAWG works
on it own without disturbing core developers by ideas, requests and
what else.

All feature requests are forms as good proposals on CWiki or ML with
rationale part. If CWAG could generate pull requests with features
implementations and bug fixes - that is the best case of our
cooperation.


=== Who the tools CAWG will use?

- New ML couch...@couchdb.apache.org for discussion, support, etc.
- CWiki for designing proposals, ideas, documenting workflow etc.
- JIRA with CouchApp component to track issues and work on them
- couchapp.org website as main informational base. I guess, we'll be
need in git repository to manage it content on the first steps, unless
there are other alternatives.


=== Who are all these peoples?

Everyone in CouchDB community who want to work on CouchApp feature.
Keyword - work, because there are a lot of people here with a lot of
ideas, but without implementing them nothing will get changed.

So far I'd propose to promote these folks:
- Ermouth
- Giovanni Lenzi
- Harald Kisch
- Josh E.
- Benjamin Young

Anyone else?

(Note, I know that some devs had not the best discussions with some of
these people, but I would like if we can abstract from emotions of the
past here, shake our hands and try to work together in the new format)

My personal role here is to be a bridge: connect CAWG with CouchDB and
provide help with Erlang bits and other project routines.


=== How this all means to CouchDB Future?

Our last mottos and slogans were focused on that we're, basically,
database for web that replicates. For now CouchApp feature is not in
the best state to put it on the front of CouchDB marketing.

If we can get CouchApps back to live and this will really work and
involve more people into CouchDB project and ecosystem - we're all in
win-win situation.



Thoughts?


--
,,,^..^,,,