couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Benoit Chesneau <bchesn...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: OTP releases and autotools
Date Mon, 01 Oct 2012 13:33:08 GMT
On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 2:57 PM, Dirkjan Ochtman <dirkjan@ochtman.nl> wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 29, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Benoit Chesneau <bchesneau@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Voilà, hopefully this thread can be a good start for merging rcouch,
>> bigcouch & apache couchdb and will ease merge of the other features imo.
>
> As a distributor, the most important deficiency in today's release
> tarballs is the fact that pretty much all the dependencies are
> bundled, with no convenient way to use system copies. IMO this should
> be done especially for C libraries like snappy and spidermonkey, but
> preferably also for the Erlang parts with an alive upstream. I haven't
> tracked it to closely, but I always get the impression that CouchDB
> just vendors upstream and isn't that good about making sure patches
> end up upstream as well (and tracking what versions correspond to the
> dependencies shipped with a given CouchDB tarball).


Not sure what you mean. spidermonkey is choosed on the system while
snappy is build statically if it's what you mean. My proposal for
package maintainer is to use the autotools for that. Which would solve
all of their needs. The autootols here would detect or use the path
choosen by the package maintainer. While we keep the possibility to
build static releases.

About upstream version, I don't think it's really a problem. We
shouldn't stop ourself to improve couchdb just because a distributions
is slow to upgrade to latest stable release. Which doesn't mean we
should always choose an upstream version. It should be choosed because
it will improve the user experience.


- benoît

Mime
View raw message