[erlang-questions] Split Cowboy's acceptor and HTTP code

Andrew Berman <>
Sat Apr 7 00:28:20 CEST 2012


Cool, yeah I meant User Docs and Tutorials.  They would be an amazing help!

--Andrew

On Fri, Apr 6, 2012 at 2:51 PM, Loïc Hoguin <> wrote:

> These are being worked on independently from any code change. And to be
> honest, most code changes these days do not come from me, as I spend most
> of my time thinking on how to best fit the remaining work into Cowboy
> rather than writing code. Of course I do that not by sitting there doing
> nothing, but by working on other things, including user guides.
>
> Cowboy already has a lot of documentation, everything is entirely
> explained through edoc (make docs). What it is lacking is user guides and
> tutorials to build real applications.
>
> It shouldn't take much longer to have something that can be pushed.
> However all the user guides written are post-0.6, meaning after the split
> occurs, even if it hasn't happened yet at this time. So the user guides
> will be on my github account for a while before we can merge it into Cowboy
> proper.
>
> As for the examples, someone has started porting misultin examples here:
> https://github.com/robertmeta/**cowboy-examples<https://github.com/robertmeta/cowboy-examples>and I'm hoping we can consolidate our and these examples into one
> repository later on.
>
>
> On 04/06/2012 11:08 PM, Andrew Berman wrote:
>
>> Loic,
>>
>> I think there are arguments for either approach, but I think way more
>> important than doing this is to  keep things the way they are and work on
>> documentation.  It's probably the single most important thing to help
>> projects become "standard."  I, for one, would really appreciate seeing
>> more documentation and samples for Cowboy rather than more code changes.
>>
>> --Andrew
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Andrew Thompson<>
>>  wrote:
>>
>>  On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 07:43:51PM +0400, Max Lapshin wrote:
>>>
>>>> If someone thinks that splitting single product into many infrastructure
>>>> packages is "convenient", I want to mention horror with debian packaging
>>>>
>>> of
>>>
>>>> erlang: erlang, erlang-base, erlang-tools, erlang-mnesia, etc
>>>>
>>>> Nothing but problems and as a result conflicting packages when you try
>>>> to
>>>> remove all that stuff and install package from esl.
>>>>
>>>
>>> As a counterpoint, consider how riak is packaged, 25 deps, 19 of which
>>> we maintain.
>>>
>>> In practice, we lock all the dependancies at release time, people
>>> running HEAD might run into some temporary issues with out of sync deps,
>>> but its not a common problem we see.
>>>
>>> You're also conflating erlang packaging with erlang *library* packaging.
>>> I agree that erlang is often packaged extremely badly by distributions,
>>> but if cowboy-acceptor is a version-locked dependancy of cowboy, there
>>> should be little chance of them getting out of sync.
>>>
>>> Andrew
>>> ______________________________**_________________
>>> erlang-questions mailing list
>>> 
>>> http://erlang.org/mailman/**listinfo/erlang-questions<http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> ______________________________**_________________
>> erlang-questions mailing list
>> 
>> http://erlang.org/mailman/**listinfo/erlang-questions<http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions>
>>
>
>
> --
> Loďc Hoguin
> Erlang Cowboy
> Nine Nines
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/attachments/20120406/479eefdc/attachment.html>


More information about the erlang-questions mailing list