[erlang-questions] how do you build your releases with/without rebar?

Loïc Hoguin essen@REDACTED
Thu Apr 10 20:16:08 CEST 2014

Another clarification.

On 04/10/2014 08:10 PM, Loïc Hoguin wrote:
> Just want to make sure one thing is clear.
> On 04/10/2014 07:52 PM, Fred Hebert wrote:
>> If you end up having to pay that price purely because the build tool you
>> settled for was opinionated about whether the apps in the apps/ or lib/
>> directory need to be checked out from other repositories or if they can
>> be in there already, fix that build tool of yours, because it's
>> clearly making decisions it should not be making.
>> What's more important is that a tool that supports both the apps/* and
>> the OTP app model can be able to also support *both* of these workflows
>> (using deps or not to build the release), depending on which is
>> appropriate for your project, team, and/or community.
>> Denying people a way to organize their own workflow because of your
>> personal opinion when the end result for the files on disk is the exact
>> same (someone just disagrees about how they ended up there), to me,
>> tells me that maybe your tool is a bit too opinionated and may need to
>> take a step back.
> With regards to erlang.mk, there's nothing to fix. There's nothing it
> does that prevent you from using the apps/* layout. There's nothing in
> it that makes it all happen for you either, because that's simply not
> the goal of the tool. But it can still fit very easily in an apps/*
> layout, as demonstrated by the gist previously posted. IRCCloud is one
> such big project that uses both erlang.mk and an apps/* layout, all
> without any problems AFAIK.
> erlang.mk will always focus on one OTP application because that's what
> it's designed to do well. Making it work on two different scopes just
> makes everything harder, and then you end up with nonsense like "rebar
> ct compile -r skip_deps=true" (quoting you) to make it do what you want.
> I do not want that. On the other hand I want to give greater power to

"I do not want that" refers to supporting the two scopes in erlang.mk 
itself. It is of course very easy to have two different scopes that do 
exactly what you want by simply having one Makefile at the top-level and 
one Makefile for each application. There's nothing preventing you to 
achieve that in a clean manner.

I will not provide a .mk file for the apps/* layout because I do not use 
it and have no idea what it should do, but I probably would accept a 
community supported "apps/* layout" file in the repository. As long as 
it's in a contrib/ directory or something of course.

> the user to override or complement the default behavior, and that
> alongside Windows support is most of the work that remains to be done
> for erlang.mk 1.0. (Not that you can't change its behavior already -it's
> a text file after all!- but I want to make it even simpler.)
> tl;dr Do one thing and do it well; do it right by default but allow
> overriding its behavior easily.

Loïc Hoguin

More information about the erlang-questions mailing list