I'm not sure if bumping to R13B04 is appropriate, since many Linux distributions (Ubuntu for e.g.) ship with older R13 releases. Therefore I would bump to R13B.
Regarding NIF extensions, are we planning to have any by 1.2? On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 12:57 AM, Robert Newson <[email protected]> wrote: > righto. > > On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 12:53 AM, Paul Davis <[email protected]> > wrote: >> I vote for just deleting the eunit bits in our packaged version. Its >> not like we use them. And I'd rather delete the eunit code rather than >> grab it as a dependency (and then deal with figuring out what to do >> when there's an installed version or not or should be but a distro has >> stripped it out). >> >> On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 6:28 PM, Robert Newson <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> I did and it was rewritten upstream >>> (https://github.com/mochi/mochiweb/commit/e8156a1c44d054f1f6e9396c828751ed22418d7f). >>> >>> It's after the release we have so we have a few options; >>> >>> 1) Upgrade to a newer version. >>> 2) Backport the patch. >>> 3) Add eunit dependency to autotools. >>> >>> I vote for 3 for 1.1 and then upgrade and revert that when mochiweb >>> makes a release with the fix. >>> >>> B. >>> >>> On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 11:11 PM, Jan Lehnardt <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> On 8 Dec 2010, at 00:05, Robert Newson wrote: >>>> >>>>> Not to hijack the thread but the Mochiweb upgrade also makes eunit a >>>>> build dependency which has caused issues on Debian installs (eunit >>>>> being a separate and optional package). >>>> >>>> Didn't you propose a patch to mochiweb that makes eunit build-optional? >>>> >>>> Cheers >>>> Jan >>>> -- >>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 11:03 PM, Robert Newson <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> +1 for R13B04. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 10:53 PM, Paul Davis >>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 5:46 PM, Paul Davis >>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>> On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 5:43 PM, Adam Kocoloski <[email protected]> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Dec 7, 2010, at 5:40 PM, Paul Davis wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 5:38 PM, Adam Kocoloski <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> Hi, the mochiweb we're shipping in 1.1.0 has abandoned support for >>>>>>>>>>> R12B05, so we should revisit our minimum required Erlang version. >>>>>>>>>>> Do we have a compelling reason for supporting anything below >>>>>>>>>>> R13B04? That release introduces support for recursive type >>>>>>>>>>> specifications, which are useful when describing revision trees and >>>>>>>>>>> JSON objects to dialyzer. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Regards, Adam >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> +1 for R13something. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Paul, is there a NIF-based argument for a particular R13 release? I >>>>>>>>> know we don't use NIFs in 1.1.x, but it'd be nice to limit the number >>>>>>>>> of times we have to bump. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Adam >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> There's nothing major that I remember in the R13 series. Maybe a few >>>>>>>> bug fixes or something, but I'd have to look. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The major NIF jump was with R14. For instance, integrating Emonk >>>>>>>> requires R14. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Also, NIF's are awesome. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I stand corrected. Out of curiosity I went back and checked the >>>>>>> progression of NIF support. Turns out they're not even available until >>>>>>> R13B03. For some reason I thought the first version was in the last of >>>>>>> the R12's. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Also, in R13B04 there are some noticeable upgrades to things like NIF >>>>>>> function signatures and other bits that would be backwards >>>>>>> incompatible (also, no one uses the version from R13B03 anymore, so if >>>>>>> we wanted to backport something it'd be a major breakage). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> So I revise my statement, I'd vote for R13B04 as the minimum. Also, it >>>>>>> has the nice symmetry of relying on the latest R$(MAJOR)B04 Erlang VM >>>>>>> which I declare to be the optimum balance between new features and >>>>>>> stability. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> > -- Filipe David Manana, [email protected], [email protected] "Reasonable men adapt themselves to the world. Unreasonable men adapt the world to themselves. That's why all progress depends on unreasonable men."
