On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 3:15 AM, Wojtek Janiszewski <[email protected]> wrote: > 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
How about we include the Erlang extensions in the source distribution, and you provide a README on how to enable the source distribution to build these extensions and any other documentation needed ? -- Luciano Resende http://people.apache.org/~lresende http://lresende.blogspot.com/
