>
> You mean the implementation from Distillery which automatically
> constructed the applications list?
>

Sorry, I meant your idea of adding release information to the list of
dependencies.


> Could you provide some details on that, or link to the previous
> discussion? I'd be interested in reading about the proposed change just for
> the context.
>

It was a very quick exchange in private on IRC. Basically we want to
support something like start_applications: [foo: :load], as you proposed
later on, but we decided to not do that because we would need to change how
Mix starts applications (today it starts applications by mostly calling
Application.ensure_all_started/2). However, if the goal is to make it
closer to releases, then the work may be worth it.


> I like this idea, though without more information I'm not precisely sure
> what is meant by "application type" here. Do you mean that in `def
> application`, one would flag whether their app is a compile-time vs.
> runtime application?
>

We are discussing two types of application configuration (hence the
confusion)

1. If it is temporary, transient or permanent
2. If it should be started, loaded, included, none or skipped (am I missing
any?)

And to agree with your last paragraph: I believe everyone agrees at this
point we should infer the applications and that bringing applications and
releases together is a good idea. The next question then is: how to make
this all possible?

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"elixir-lang-core" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to elixir-lang-core+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elixir-lang-core/CAGnRm4%2B9x%2BVdar9vFcMk_GzjFOnpVe_j8EfBKP2gS9%2BG92g5Uw%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to