On 2010-01-15, at 22:03, Luciano Resende wrote: > On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 9:53 AM, Wojtek Janiszewski > <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi Luciano. >> >> I found that binding-erlang and binding-erlang-runtime weren't released in >> 1.5.1 because of the problem with samples [1]. Samples won't run without >> Erlang distribution installed. Also we need to have Erlang distribution on >> build machine - without it JUnit will skip many tests. I raised appropriate >> JIRA issue [2] long time ago and updated it today (made it critical). I'd >> say to include binding.erlang* and samples in 1.6 but after we'll get Erlang >> distribution installed on build machine and tests executing successfully. >> >> Thanks, >> Wojtek >> >> [1] - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-3271 >> [2] - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-2069 >> > > Thanks Wojtek > > Could you help me understand what's the current status of the > binding and sample ? Are they running in any automated fashion, or the > user always have to download and install erlang manually first ? Is > there any way we could automate the installation via ant-script as we > do with dojo and other sdk today ? > > As for the build machine, I have updated the jira asking for help > getting it installed on the build machine, but that's not a must-have > to get in the release... if we have automated way to get it working > locally, and the tests passing, it should be sufficient to get it in > the release. > > Please let me know how I can further assist on this matter. > > -- > Luciano Resende > http://people.apache.org/~lresende > http://lresende.blogspot.com/
I finished development of binding.erlang modules and samples and they are working for me. There is also extension guide on official Tuscany site. For now it's required for user to install Erlang distribution manually. We could try to automatize this process, but there are few issues: 1. For Linux/Mac OS X there are sources available only (installation by ./configure && make && make install) so there would be other dependencies (make, gcc). 2. On Windows compilation process requires Visual Studio, which is not as easy to get as open source tools like make and gcc. I would say to use official Windows installer (Erlang binary distribution), which is user interactive - makes automated process of installing Erlang dependencies not so automated. 3. Compilation time - it took me about 20 minutes on 2 core 2GHz Intel CPU. 4. Archive size - sources are 56MB, Windows binary installer is 80MB. I'm guessing that including such big thing as Erlang distribution into build may potentially bring more problems and confusion than help. What do you think? Thanks, Wojtek
