Longstanding issues: structs & standalone Erlang

[Nigel Head]

On 22/02/06, Mikael Karlsson <mikael.karlsson@REDACTED> wrote:
[...]

> The problem with deployment on Erlang, as I see it, is that it is not
> possible
> to add new applications to releases, and that they all have to go into the
> erlang root library. It would be nice if Erlang could have a secondary
> library path that was searched too, meaning that you could deploy
> applications
> in an own library without having to do code:add_path{a,z} for everyone of
> them. And making it easy to upgrade your Erlang base system without
> affecting
> your own additions.


I have to say that I don't find the use of .erlang too terribly onerous for
doing the add_path work.
In spirit it's kind of like the venerable
.cshrc|autoexec.bat|<your_own_choice>|...

Of course you wouldn't want installers just vomiting all over the .erlang
file but I don't think it would be too hard to establish a convention for
organising the adding of application specific setup segments ...

--
N.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/attachments/20060223/745551b6/attachment.htm>