Should I remove the whole section for 1.1.2? (My guess is yes.) On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 8:08 PM, Noah Slater <[email protected]> wrote:
> As in, within a few hours, preferably. > > > On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 8:06 PM, Randall Leeds <[email protected]>wrote: > >> On Feb 9, 2012 6:09 PM, "Randall Leeds" <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 17:48, Jason Smith <[email protected]> wrote: >> > > Hi, Noah. When I saw it hit Git, I realized it was a breaking change, >> > > and I asked around. If memory serves, Randall happened to be on at the >> > > time and he asked me the same question you just did. I said I never >> > > saw an RFC email and that's when he realized it was not done publicly. >> > >> > I was aware the entire time, but I think the motivation is sound and >> > it needed to be done. A couple committers spoke up to say we didn't >> > think it was sensitive enough to warrant the private discussion but >> > ultimately there was broad consensus on the implementation and the >> > change itself. One of those (let us all celebrate) extremely rare >> > times where there wasn't opportunity for broad community input. >> > >> > Creating a view on _users that pulls the relevant parts of a user >> > document out is the way forward for public profiles, I think. >> > If someone would write a blog post showing how that works it'd be >> > great. In retrospect this would have been a great thing to do weeks >> > ago. Lesson learned. >> >> Just to be clear I don't want to dismiss your concerns. If you believe >> this >> needs a config option rather than just documentation now is a good time to >> speak up loudly since the vote was aborted. >> >> > >> > Now to test! >> > >> > -R >> > >> > > >> > > I am pleased and grateful for the 1.2 release. It's remarkable! I'll >> > > simply remind the community, don't email a plus-one just because the >> > > unit tests pass. Install your application! Test your application! If >> > > you use _users in your Couch app, this will be the most significant >> > > breaking change since the 0.9 release. >> > > >> > > On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 8:25 AM, Noah Slater <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > >> Did you bring this up on the RFC thread or in private, Jason? >> > >> >> > >> On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 1:16 AM, Jason Smith <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > >> >> > >>> On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 7:52 AM, Noah Slater <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > >>> > Hello, >> > >>> > >> > >>> > I would like call a vote for the Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 release, >> first >> > >>> round. >> > >>> >> > >>> Documents in the _users database are no longer publicly readable. >> > >>> >> > >>> I understand that there was no public RFC about this due to its >> > >>> security implications? >> > >>> >> > >>> Iris Couch users have been running the 1.2.x beta builds for a few >> > >>> ekes and this is the top point of feedback. People have to rewrite >> > >>> their Couch apps, in particular because most of Chris's projects and >> > >>> examples uses _user to keep public profiles (nickname, Gravatar URL, >> > >>> etc.). >> > >>> >> > >>> I suppose this is old news. The decision is good. It's a documented >> > >>> breaking change. Fine. I hope there isn't blowback though. >> > >>> >> > >>> -- >> > >>> Iris Couch >> > >>> >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > -- >> > > Iris Couch >> > >
