> It's simpler if B has a dependency on A, since it means A has to be > started before B can be started, which would likely work out fine. >
Right. :D I meant the opposite. I will check systools and see how it would handle those cases closely. > I don't like the idea of "extra_applications" though, the name just > doesn't seem to express what the list is really there for - namely to > provide metadata about the load/start behaviour of applications. Maybe it's > simpler/clearer to break them out, e.g. "loaded_applications", > "started_applications", where the latter allows one to specify the start > type, defaulting to :permanent. Thoughts? > The last proposal completely dropped the ability to set an application as permanent, temporary, etc. hence the name :extra_applications. If we are going to have such ability, I would stick with :start_applications previously proposed. -- *José Valim* www.plataformatec.com.br Skype: jv.ptec Founder and Director of R&D -- 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%2BRcrmMZcfmivW9Hp3sQx_U56%3Dg38OjkonpFQoOv%3DTc5g%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.