On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 2:27 PM, Noah Slater wrote:
>
> On 16 Nov 2009, at 19:01, Paul Davis wrote:
>
>> As soon as I commit the couchjs refactor it should be extremely easy
>> (relatively speaking) to replace the HTTP interface with any sort of
>> bindings that are desired. I made sure to have th
On 16 Nov 2009, at 19:01, Paul Davis wrote:
As soon as I commit the couchjs refactor it should be extremely easy
(relatively speaking) to replace the HTTP interface with any sort of
bindings that are desired. I made sure to have the HTTP interface
enabled by a single function call so that the c
On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 1:00 PM, Chris Anderson wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 7:04 PM, Noah Slater wrote:
>>
>> On 12 Nov 2009, at 23:05, Chris Anderson wrote:
>>
>>> Using a different engine ought to be trivial. Thanks for keeping us in the
>>> loop.
>>
>> What about the curl bindings?
>>
>
>
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 7:04 PM, Noah Slater wrote:
>
> On 12 Nov 2009, at 23:05, Chris Anderson wrote:
>
>> Using a different engine ought to be trivial. Thanks for keeping us in the
>> loop.
>
> What about the curl bindings?
>
They aren't strictly necessary unless you want to run the headless
t
On Thu, 2009-11-12 at 17:15 -0800, Mikeal Rogers wrote:
> Just out of curiosity, what are those js engines?
>
gjs and, iirc, libseed. You can find both in the GNOME git server
(http://git.gnome.org)
On 12 Nov 2009, at 23:05, Chris Anderson wrote:
Using a different engine ought to be trivial. Thanks for keeping us
in the loop.
What about the curl bindings?
Just out of curiosity, what are those js engines?
-Mikeal
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 1:44 PM, Rodrigo Moya wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-11-12 at 13:23 -0800, Mikeal Rogers wrote:
> > What is "the javascript engine situation" for those not as intimately
> > familiar.
> >
> yeah, sorry
>
> the problem is th
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 1:44 PM, Rodrigo Moya
wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-11-12 at 13:23 -0800, Mikeal Rogers wrote:
>> What is "the javascript engine situation" for those not as intimately
>> familiar.
>>
> yeah, sorry
>
> the problem is that right now there are 2 javascript engines being used
> in dif
On Thu, 2009-11-12 at 13:23 -0800, Mikeal Rogers wrote:
> What is "the javascript engine situation" for those not as intimately
> familiar.
>
yeah, sorry
the problem is that right now there are 2 javascript engines being used
in different GNOME modules, and adding couchdb means adding a 3rd one.
What is "the javascript engine situation" for those not as intimately
familiar.
-Mikeal
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 2:12 AM, Rodrigo Moya wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-11-11 at 21:02 -0800, Joshua Bronson wrote:
> > in case this hasn't made its way onto this list yet (apologies if i
> > missed it!)...
> >
>
On Wed, 2009-11-11 at 21:02 -0800, Joshua Bronson wrote:
> in case this hasn't made its way onto this list yet (apologies if i
> missed it!)...
>
yes, for next cycle it will be accepted, I hope. The reason for not
accepting it (couchdb-glib and evolution-couchdb) this time is that it's
still a wor
in case this hasn't made its way onto this list yet (apologies if i
missed it!)...
-- Forwarded message --
From: Bengt Kleberg
Date: Nov 11, 2:53 am
Subject: link: CouchDB almost a GNOME dependency during this cycle.
To: Erlang Programming
So maybe next cycle?
12 matches
Mail list logo