On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 6:14 AM, Filipe David Manana <[email protected]> wrote: > 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? >
Nothing has been planned for 1.2. Adam's thought was to just anticipate that we might use them eventually and so we might want to plan ahead with the requirement change to anticipate possibly using NIFs. > 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." >
