A Joeish Erlang distribution (long)
Mon Jan 27 16:24:35 CET 2003
Mon 27 Jan 2003 Valentin wrote:
> > >Erlang is ready for an alternative distribution.
> I would strongly oppose this view as it can easily kill Erlang. You cannot
> possibly judge about ability to sustain more than one distribution based on
> a "recent discussion on the list". Partitioning Erlang would only reduce
> from critical mass required to raise Erlang to the next level (whatever
> that might be). Let' s keep things together for another few years -- if
> Eralng has to evolve, let it evolve as a whole...
I am very much in favour of an alternative distibution or a
distribution that would focus on web application development.
I think Jocke is pointing somehow out that the next level is reached,
and that focus is much on Internet applications.
Open Source Erlang is getting a lot of attention and contributions that
fall outside the telecom sector but are useful for others. It would be
nice to somehow get those in, but I do not think this is a task, nor
possible from resource point of view, for the OTP group.
We should of course be careful not to partition Erlang.
So if not an alternative distribution, maybe as Joe suggests a much
smaller core, and then the possibility to add on applications or
bundles of applications to "personalize" Erlang, to for instance
*Web Applications* ( I know, I said it again :).
This could also have the positive effect of getting new users attracted to
Erlang as it would be easier to use it for their application domain.
More information about the erlang-questions