[erlang-questions] modular otp concerns

Steve Vinoski vinoski@REDACTED
Tue Feb 18 15:27:56 CET 2014

On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 9:11 AM, Vlad Dumitrescu <vladdu55@REDACTED> wrote:

> Hi,
> On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 12:48 PM, Tuncer Ayaz <tuncer.ayaz@REDACTED>wrote:
>> I know that at least Bjoern-Egil has been investigating the possibility of
>> splitting up otp.git into sub repos, and before anything is set into
>> stone, I'd like to resolve one concern I have.
>> What will happen to the default distribution and the bundled libraries?
>> Is the plan to split it into core and extra? I'm concerned that if we
>> follow that route, we would lose the ability to rely on pretty useful
>> functionality available out of the box. For example, today it's very
>> convenient that I can write an escript which:
>>  * interacts with the network (http, ssh, snmp, etc.)
>>  * compiles sources for various languages
>>  * creates or extracts tarballs or zip archives
>>  * inspects a (remote) node
>>  * much more...
> One thought about this: there are several levels of modularity that could
> be enabled, but as a first step I think that what could be separated are
> the telecom-specific libraries (asn1, cos*, megaco, diameter). Snmp is on
> the fence.

The enterprise version of Riak, which isn't a telecom-specific system, uses
snmp because some customers rely on it for monitoring and alerts. Surely
other non-telco apps use snmp as well.

public_key currently relies on asn1, so it can't go away just yet either.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/attachments/20140218/4242857e/attachment.htm>

More information about the erlang-questions mailing list