[erlang-questions] Rebar dependency recursion

Tuncer Ayaz <>
Mon Nov 5 00:56:51 CET 2012


On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 2:55 AM, Tim Watson wrote:
>
> On 1 Nov 2012, at 21:50, Tuncer Ayaz wrote:
>
>> So your idea is that commands should explicitly announce if they
>> want to be used recursively and otherwise ignore non-base_dir
>> applications with -r meaning "force all commands to process
>> deps/sub_dirs", right? How would you handle the case that compile
>> is happy to process sub_dirs/deps but you want to compile just
>> base_dir?
>
> I think we need to go back to 'it just works' in that instance.
> Compile wants to recurse because headers in sub dirs might have
> changed and dependency checking and compiling based on
> need/dependency is 'the right thing to do' always.
>
> My thought was that some actions have to take place recursively on
> order to be correctly applied, and it's no good letting people
> override them. For something like test runs, doc building, xref, and
> so on, it can and should be optional. But compile/resolve shouldn't
> be. Adding that API to core would mean that internal and plugin
> modules get a means to enforce the right behaviour.

This could work. I'll let you all know once the prototype is ready
for testing.



More information about the erlang-questions mailing list