[erlang-questions] Turning rebar into a package manager

[Tim Watson]

Ah ok! Yes I agree with this. 

On 24 Oct 2012, at 16:14, Loïc Hoguin <essen@REDACTED> wrote:

> On 10/24/2012 05:10 PM, Tim Watson wrote:
>>> As for rebar being per-repo, that's not that true anymore.
>> 
>> How so? I'm still under the impression that this remains true:
>> 
>> - it gets dependencies locally
>> - resolving dependencies outside base_dir can break things
>> 
>> Maybe I've or become a bit out of touch with the bleeding edge changes. I'm a huge rebar fan/user so please correct me if I'm wrong.
>> 
>>> And since it's pretty much the de facto standard now, it's not really needed now.
>>> 
>> 
>> Are you saying rebar is the de facto standard? I wish it was, and do wonder if inclusion in otp would make it more likely to be.
>> 
>> And what's not really needed? This expm thing, or a package manager in general?
> 
> I was talking about including rebar inside repositories. It's not really needed anymore. Haven't had it in cowboy for maybe a year and nobody seemed to complain. I think it's OK today to tell people to install rebar (or update their rebar if you need a more recent feature).
> 
> -- 
> Loïc Hoguin
> Erlang Cowboy
> Nine Nines
> http://ninenines.eu