Re: [PROPOSAL] Allow rewrites to be JS function

This discussion has gone round and round a couple of times in different forms so I will avoid repeating my previous points but from working on PouchDB, the focus on having 'PouchDB' be a database only is fairly liberating, by not trying to add fairly arbitrary "application platform" features into

Re: EUnit Tests

Outstanding work! Thanks all involved! :) Best Jan -- > On 20 Oct 2015, at 03:04, Nick Vatamaniuc wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > This is another update regarding the status of EUnit tests. > > With the help of Maria Andersson, Alexander Shorin and other team > members, we

Re: EUnit Tests

Yay!! \o/ Thanks for the great work on the tests! Maria, Nick, and Alex: you all rock! :D Michelle > On Oct 19, 2015, at 9:44 PM, Kyle Snavely wrote: > > This is really wonderful Nick, thanks everyone for making the push on CI! > > Kyle > >> On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 9:04

Re: [PROPOSAL] Allow rewrites to be JS function

On the server side you can run what ever JavaScript you want, it is far less limited than client side JavaScript. PouchDB also runs on the server and has the exact same issue in terms of seperation of concerns. PouchDB doesnt expect developers to do dom manipulation, templating, scheduling and

Re: [PROPOSAL] Allow rewrites to be JS function

Hi Dale I dont understand the “integrate with their use case as best as we possibly can” when it comes to rewrite and reverse proxy. As far as I know there is nothing to integrate here. The joy for PouchDB to be a pure database is very understandable, since it sits in this rich environment that

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

Re: [PROPOSAL] Allow rewrites to be JS function

What Dale and the others said. And what I explained at length on the marketing@ mailing list to the very same people: This project doesn’t have the capacity to get a distributed syncing database AND an application server platform going at the same time. And the people who are doing the lion’s

Re: Fauxton Windows developer question

Woul > On 20 Oct 2015, at 18:03, 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

Re: EUnit Tests

Progress! :) > On 20 Oct 2015, at 12:22, Jan Lehnardt wrote: > > Outstanding work! Thanks all involved! :) > > Best > Jan > -- > >> On 20 Oct 2015, at 03:04, Nick Vatamaniuc wrote: >> >> Hi everyone, >> >> This is another update regarding the status of

Submissions – CouchDB Weekly News

Hello all! please send me submissions for tomorrow's CouchDB Weekly News, if you have any.. Especially for - News in the CouchDB and PouchDB universe - Interesting use cases - CouchDB related events Thank you! Katharina

Re: Fauxton Windows developer question

Sorry. Robert, would this work if you wrapped these more-than-one-liners into small JS projects, and maybe use shell.js so you get the portability? Best Jan -- > On 20 Oct 2015, at 18:03, Joan Touzet wrote: > > Hi Robert, > > I'm presently migrating our one Makefile left

Re: [PROPOSAL] Allow rewrites to be JS function

Extendability and Upgradability with npm - what could be more extendable and more flexible? I like the expression "Single Shot Application Server" - that smells like a glance of its own. There is always a way top-down AND bottom-up otherwise it feels for me that there is something missing.

Re: [PROPOSAL] Allow rewrites to be JS function

- Original Message - > From: "Harald Kisch" > To: dev@couchdb.apache.org > Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2015 11:45:18 AM > Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Allow rewrites to be JS function > > Extendability and Upgradability with npm - what could be more > extendable > and

Re: Fauxton Windows developer question

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

RE: [PROPOSAL] Allow rewrites to be JS function

> I very much think a single shot application server is a great idea (see > firebase), however I am very much of the opinion that it should be built on > top of CouchDB, not into it. Agree with Dale. The architecture (last I checked) for these extension points (_rewrite, etc) are (or once