Welcome to the Jungerl!

Chris Pressey <>
Tue Feb 25 09:34:51 CET 2003

On 22 Feb 2003 02:03:09 +0100
Luke Gorrie <> wrote:

> [...]
> I think it all makes a nice picture, and would like try hacking Erlang
> programs in this way. To this end, I've created a new sourceforge
> project called the 'jungerl': "A Primeval Jungle of Erlang code". It
> is quite simply a new CVS tree that I have added many of the existing
> Erlang User Contributions to, and that anyone who wishes can have full
> developer access on.

You, Tarzan.  Me, ecstatic :)

On Mon, 24 Feb 2003 22:10:38 +0100
Mikael Karlsson <> wrote:

> [...] 
> I agree! Great with one checkout point for all libs.
> But....some questions.
> 1. The build scripts assume "include" directories, but some are just
> named 
>      "inc". Which is the preferred way for Erlang?
> 2. Some libs, like xmerl,  has a later version in another cvs repository
>     under sourceforge. How will they be kept in sync? What happens
>     if anyone updates the one under jungerl. Will the admin of the other
>     one see to it that they are in sync, or shall we expect them to
>     diverge, or shall they all go under the jungerl tree?
> /Mikael

I don't know if my vision coincides with Luke's, but:

Individual project managers will have to decide for themselves what to do
with the versions of their projects that have made it inside Jungerl. 
They might decide to use Jungerl as the main development outlet.  They
might decide to just merge in the changes from Jungerl that they like, for
their (stable) releases.  Or they might just ignore the Jungerl fork.

I think it's easy to overthink about how anarchical systems should be
managed.  Because, they shouldn't, or they're not really anarchical :)

On Tue, 25 Feb 2003 00:02:42 -0000
Sean Hinde <> wrote:

> [...]
> I do think this will need some active management from someone who gets a
> kick out of organising things (i.e. defintely not me!) To be useful for
> the widest audience we really need to avoid it becoming Junkerl.. Like
> should we have a new project called
> random_build_tools_which_are_all_useful_but_dont_work_together?! I guess
> the project mailing list is the place to sort these issues out.

I think I disagree, well sorta...

I think Erlang already has User Contributions for a place to show
restraint.  I think Jungerl could fill the role of the bleeding edge

If random build tools are added that don't work together, well, maybe
someone will eventually fix that, maybe not; in the meantime you can
always touch SKIP on whatever's broken or inapplicable or not of interest
to you.

Primeval jungles aren't supposed to be civilized places...


More information about the erlang-questions mailing list