On 2010-01-19, at 00:21, Luciano Resende wrote:

> 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/

Ok, that sounds good for me. I'll update documentation to match changes. 
I guess we just disable building Erlang modules by ie. commenting out them in 
modules/pom.xml so the user will have to uncomment them in source distribution 
manually. That's it?

Thanks,
Wojtek

Reply via email to