On 04/22/2013 05:24 PM, Matwey V. Kornilov wrote:

Hi All,

I've just accepted one request and declined the other.

And I would like to discuss following thing: why do you name -src packages as -devel? Is there strong underlying reason to do that? I am not insist on -src at all, but It may lead to misconception, because you do not need src/*.erl files to develop application that uses function from this module.

We also have some packages installing header files into -src / -devel. Maybe we should just not create those sub-packages at all?

Also, maybe there you will find answers to some questions and further links:

https://en.opensuse.org/User:Matwey/Erlang_guidelines_draft#Further_informat...

-- With best regards, Matwey V. Kornilov http://0x2207.blogspot.com xmpp:0x2207@jabber.ru

-- With kind regards, Sascha Peilicke SUSE Linux GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, D-90409 Nuernberg, Germany GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org

Nanuk Krinner wrote:

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Peter/Erlang_Packaging_Guidelines says: "Header files for erlang modules must be bundled with main package (not in *-devel). They are very often used by system administrators right from the REPL console."

This story is mostly about -records (kind of structures in C). -records are syntax sugar and converted to tuples at compile-time [1]. There is also no way to know at runtime, whether this tuple is actually tuple or it is a - record. But If you want pretty-printing of output at runtime in erlang-shell (or you want to call a function which want -record at input) you have to have .hrl and to use rr("my_header.hrl"). I understand that this sounds little strange not to put headers into -devel package. [1] http://www.erlang.org/doc/man/shell.html -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org

Sascha Peilicke wrote:

As long as we communicate that in the spec file, I guess Factory review won't have issues with that. So what about the -src sub-packages, do we actually need to ship them at all? If not, I'd just drop that.

As far as I understand the situation, when you use dializer (it is a kind of debugger) you need either sources or +debug_info. And I don't know any other applications. When you compile code with +debug_info, the AST is included into .beam files as metainfo. The second great advance of +debug_info is that crash-reports become much more informative. You can run sasl application with your code (rabbitmq runs it by default). Yet again, it is strange to compile code with +debug_info for production, but... As for me, It is worth to follow Lemenkov's recommendations: 1) compile everything with +debug_info 2) not to compile src (or relaxed version: if maintainer wants to package sources, package them separately as -src). [1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Peter/Erlang_Packaging_Guidelines -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org