[erlang-questions] is sys.config mostly a convention?

[Xavier Noria]

On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 11:13 AM, Richard Carlsson <
carlsson.richard@REDACTED> wrote:

Like an operating system, Erlang has several levels. The runtime system
> boot stuff assumes very little about standard libraries at all, and what
> you're going to do with any flags that don't affect the runtime system
> directly. Then the kernel and stdlib basics adds some conventions but still
> don't assume too much about overall system behaviour. Then, the application
> controller adds conventions about applications and -config (but lets you
> have as many config files as you like, with arbitrary names). Then, the
> release handler and reltool, if you use them, add further conventions, such
> as "you should only have one main config file". (For historical reasons,
> you may also find abstraction leaks between these layers.)
>

Thanks Richard.

Yes, I understand this has to be like an onion, with the inner levels
providing generic support and assuming less, and the outer levels enforcing
more and exposing the actual contract. Also, I guess documentation and
implementation have gone through a lot of evolution with all its practical
implications.

In this particular case, though, take this:

*"When starting Erlang in embedded mode, it is assumed that exactly one
system configuration file is used, named sys.config."*

I believe that wording is not accurate, because I see actually no code
assuming that. Inner, or outer! Don't you think that something like

*"By convention, releases are expected to have one system configuration
file named sys.config stored in such and such."*

*?*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/attachments/20180214/0fef2630/attachment.htm>