Directory structure for non-OTP projects
Thu Jul 21 12:31:04 CEST 2005
We have our own homegrown build tool which exports apps from CVS, does
some tag checks, builds the beam files and then the boot scripts. It is
not ideal but it kind of does the job. You might want to look at the
builder app in jungerl. I was a beta tester for it and it is quite
good. The only reason we never adopted it for our work is inertia.
On 21 Jul 2005, at 10:33, Tim Bates wrote:
> Claes Wikstom wrote:
>> I don't like the OTP build environment one bit. The Makefiles are hard
>> to read and debug.
>> If your project is reasonably small you could take a look at the
>> yaws build environment. It's easier/more naive than otp and doesn't
>> any bootscripts at all.
> Thanks klacke, but the yaws build environment does not appear to deal
> with multiple applications, nor have I any idea how the test_server
> would fit in with all of this.
> I've looked at a couple of other open source projects, including eddie
> and ejabberd. None of them uses quite the same build environment or
> directory structure as OTP. I'd like not to roll my own, so: does
> use the directory structure recommended in the OTP Design Principles?
> so, how have they set up their build environment? How does this build
> environment interact with the erl shell, the test_server and OTP
More information about the erlang-questions