[erlang-questions] Dependencies on library applications

[Garrett Smith]

On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 8:25 AM, Loïc Hoguin <essen@REDACTED> wrote:
> On 12/17/2012 03:20 PM, Garrett Smith wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 3:05 AM, Loďc Hoguin <essen@REDACTED> wrote:
>>
>> -snip-
>>
>>> On 12/17/2012 04:48 AM, Anders Nygren wrote:
>>>>
>>>> In the documentation it says, in
>>>> http://www.erlang.org/doc/design_principles/applications.html#id73720
>>>> about the .app file
>>>> "applications
>>>> All applications which must be started before this application is
>>>> started. systools uses this list to generate correct boot scripts.
>>>> Defaults to [], but note that all applications have dependencies to at
>>>> least kernel and stdlib."
>>>>
>>>> a few years ago I complained about an OTP application that did not
>>>> list a library application that it depended on, but did not have to be
>>>> started and was told that I was wrong.
>>>>
>>>> see, http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-bugs/2007-April/000333.html
>>>> for more details
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Alright.
>>>
>>> But, directing my question to OTP guys now, wouldn't it be simpler if
>>> we'd
>>> list library applications there too? Building releases would be much
>>> easier
>>> if all dependencies were listed somewhere and it appears this has no
>>> negative impact to put them in applications. Correct me if I'm wrong.
>>
>>
>> Are you not talking about included applications?
>>
>> http://www.erlang.org/doc/design_principles/included_applications.html
>
> No.
>
> Included applications are normal applications that are included into another
> application's supervision tree directly.

You're just quoting the docs :)

They don't *have* to be included in anything -- but they are
nonetheless listed as a dependency. The point is that they aren't
started by init on behalf of your app.

Does listing the app in the included_applications list present a
particular problem for your case?

Garrett