> On 26 Jan 2015, at 22:42 , Dirkjan Ochtman <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 8:18 PM, Jan Lehnardt <[email protected]> wrote: >> I’m also in favour of getting Nano into the Apache CouchDB fold. > > I'm curious; would you like to bring more CouchDB libraries into the > Apache project proper?
I’m in favour of this. > Why do you think that would be an improvement? In the past, we let the community come up with whatever it needs, which was a decent call, but it has lead to a situation, where we have 5+ libraries per language and they all implement another 80%-set of the CouchDB functionality. When one gets started with CouchDB, there is always some research to be done, on what to use. I think it would be beneficial for people new to CouchDB to know where to get the definite library that will get them started. That still leaves room for more specialised or opinionated libraries beside that. One of the things that people like about MongoDB is that it is so easy to get started with, because the language integration is part of the whole package and maintained by the MongoDB people. I wouldn’t mind stealing that from their run book. > What are the advantages to both the CouchDB project and a random library > project? In this specific case, the project maintainer wants to make sure the project survives and trusts this community with it. For every other library that we may or may not be integrating, it will depend :) I’d be happy to make it work for everyone, though. A side benefit, as I see it, is that more people get familiar with the CouchDB development process and are more likely to help out on other things on the project. Best Jan -- > > Cheers, > > Dirkjan
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
