On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 5:51 AM, Benoit Chesneau <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 10:05 AM, Randall Leeds <[email protected]> > wrote: >> I like this. >> I'd love to see a branch that contains all the incremental changes >> from trunk to this build. >> I would build and test it and help you work out any kinks. >> > Hi, > > Cool. I've create a branch on my github here : > > https://github.com/benoitc/couchdb/tree/otp > > I've for now moved code and put needed changes in couchdb source: > > https://github.com/benoitc/couchdb/commit/826cb1c5853347ca7826312a4c2b893120165552 > > For now build doen't work, I need to connect bits to the autotools > config files and make needed changes in Makefiles. > > Related question: > - do we have to build our own rebar version ? (which means that we > need to include its sources, then where in the repo)
While rebar is definitely awesome, it's quite opinionated with opions that will make it non trivial to integrate into an Autotools build. Specifically, I haven't figured out how to make it work in a VPATH build. While I don't think its impossible, the non-trivialness makes me wonder if it'll be worth the cost. The main benefits of using rebar (originally) were that it enforces OTP layouts and compiles things much faster. Perhaps we should just write a small tool that does the compilation in parallel instead of trying to wedge a square hole into a hypercube. > - @davisp will it be possible with the passage from svn to git to > maintain multiple repos on couchdb project ? eg: repos for ejson and > snappy-erlang ? For now I include them in the deps folder anyway, but > it may be better to sepratae them and just get them when we build > archives? > No, a Git repo at ASF will carry the same weight as a top level SVN project directory. > works in progress, anyway. More is coming soon. > > - benoît >
