[erlang-questions] What problem are we trying to solve here? [was Erland users group [was re: languages in use? [was: Time for OTP to be Renamed?]]]

[Garrett Smith]

On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 6:52 PM, Anthony Ramine <n.oxyde@REDACTED> wrote:
> My own opinion is that any Erlang package manager relying on GitHub for whatever more than hosting a simple Git repository is doomed to fail. Feel free to disprove me through making one.

The magic here is that packages can be constructed, in real time,
lazily, and reliably, on your workstation -- through a simple git
repository.

In time and space this exists today.

> Companies make money around Erlang, if they want such a thing, money will need to be thrown at it for the infrastructure, there is just no way around it. If an index should be, the applications going into the main one are going to need some level of validation, otherwise it's just a garbage bin which language zealots will use to tell the world we have 66,000 packages available.

What exists today is this garbage bin, as you call it. It does seem to
work in some capacity. It might not fit your vision, but it's what
exists.

> Validation means testing, continuous integration and all that entails. GitHub will not help you here.

$ git clone git@REDACTED:anthonyrules/super-cool-repo.git
$ cd super-cool-repo
$ make check
$ sudo make install

You can even create a Jenkins job that automates this... to make it official CI.

My complaint over github is that it's *too* centralized. I'd vote for
more chaos, where the *real* stuff is only found at warehouse raves in
dark corners, on SD cards, traded for illicit substances and other
unspeakables.

Maybe I'll distribute e2 that way.

"Did you get a taste of 1.1 RC3 in San Fran last night -- OMG that
stuff is *amaaaazing*!"

Garrett

P.S I'm partly serious about the rave distro scheme. I think I share
yours any others view that a single, centralized purveyor of source or
packages or whatever is a terrible idea. Mirrors, or distributed git
repos on table top SD cards FTW.