A Joeish Erlang distribution (long)

Joakim G. <>
Tue Jan 28 10:41:21 CET 2003


Sebastian Strollo wrote:

<CUT>

> 
> But, a good packaging system would be great, I would really like a
> more modularized distribution and from Kenneth it seems that it is on
> the way - great! But given that, I really don't see how your
> (i.e. Jocke:-) other ideas (apart perhaps from new language
> constructs, and without branching off the Erlang/OTP code base which
> no-one including yourself seems to think is a good idea, I don't see
> how it could be done) would require a new distribution?

It may not. I didn't have a clue that Kenneth&Co was about to repackage
Erlang/OTP.

If they decide retarget/reniche the core target as well (in the vicinity
of my propsal) I would swoon (if possible).

> If people got
> together to write good documentation with more web inspired examples
> that would be great, and talks promoting Erlang as a COPL is also a
> good thing!

A new book is on its way it seems. Really good news. The way it describes
and examplifies the "new" Erlang is crucial. OTP? Pure Erlang? COPL? ...

> I say lets work on making the existing distribution better and
> complement it with as much external resources as we can. A more
> systematic way of dealing with patches from the community by the OTP
> (as has been suggested before) would be great. Another idea for the
> OTP team: maybe a list of things that you feel needs work, but is
> currently not being worked on by the OTP group (due to lack of time or
> whatever). Hmm, I vaguely recall that there used to be such a page on
> erlang.org with future project ideas or whatever... Well I don't know,

Yes, yes, yes.

Cheers
/Jocke
-- 
If you think the pen is mightier than the sword, the next time someone
pulls out a sword I'd like to see you get up there with your Bic.




More information about the erlang-questions mailing list