Re: [DISCUSS] Rewriting the CouchDB HTTP Layer

2014-08-21 Thread Paul Davis
I'm all for dropping R14 at some point but given the R15/R16 stability issues its not super clear when will be a good time to drop that. It does seem like I'm seeing more people running R16B03 and R17 though so maybe it'll be soon enough we won't have to care when we get to the 3.0 stage. Though I

Re: [DISCUSS] Rewriting the CouchDB HTTP Layer

2014-08-21 Thread Russell Branca
How long do we want to keep supporting R14B01? Hopefully we can jump ship over to 17 at some point and stay more current with Erlang releases. Both WebMachine and Cowboy supoort the REST-ful resource declarations which I'm a fan of, but using those would introduce breaking changes to the CouchDB A

Re: [DISCUSS] Rewriting the CouchDB HTTP Layer

2014-08-20 Thread Paul Davis
One ding against Cowboy is that Loïc isn't very interested in supporting old releases so we'd have to make minor updates if we wan't to keep supporting the R14B01 releases. Last time I did this it was trivial but a bit of an annoyance that such a trivial change was something I'd have to maintain do

Re: [DISCUSS] Rewriting the CouchDB HTTP Layer

2014-08-20 Thread Russell Branca
Thanks Andy! The next step I want to take is build another prototype in Cowboy and compare it with the web machine implementation. Hopefully will have some time for that over the weekend. -Russell On Aug 20, 2014 5:01 AM, "Andy Wenk" wrote: > Hey Russel, > > I have read your blog post about "Re

Re: [DISCUSS] Rewriting the CouchDB HTTP Layer

2014-08-20 Thread Andy Wenk
Hey Russel, I have read your blog post about "Rewriting the CouchDB HTTP Layer". Thanks a lot for that! As a note from a non-core-CouchDB-dev - this sounds great and very reasonable. Making the code easier to test, removing unnecessary code duplication, organising the code even better and making

Re: [DISCUSS] Rewriting the CouchDB HTTP Layer

2014-08-18 Thread Russell Branca
On Aug 17, 2014 8:15 PM, "Jason Smith" wrote: > > Hi, Russell. This is okay for a starting point but it is a bit vague. Could > you perhaps flesh out the plan and make it more comprehensive? > > ^^ That is a joke! > > Seriously, thank you very much for this analysis and plan. This is very > exciti

Re: [DISCUSS] Rewriting the CouchDB HTTP Layer

2014-08-17 Thread Jason Smith
Hi, Russell. This is okay for a starting point but it is a bit vague. Could you perhaps flesh out the plan and make it more comprehensive? ^^ That is a joke! Seriously, thank you very much for this analysis and plan. This is very exciting! (Not least because the http codebase is the part I know b

[DISCUSS] Rewriting the CouchDB HTTP Layer

2014-08-17 Thread Russell Branca
# Rewriting the CouchDB HTTP Layer With the light at the end of tunnel on the BigCouch merge, I thought it was time to get the conversation going on cleaning up the current HTTP stack duality. We've got a good opportunity to do some major cleanup, remove duplication, and really start more clearly