Optional dependencies? #28

Closed
yrashk opened this Issue Oct 30, 2012 · 7 comments

Projects

None yet

2 participants

@yrashk
yrashk commented Oct 30, 2012

Quick question — have you considered making dependencies optional? Ideally both, but at least edown — it is definitely not needed by projects that use gproc. Also, gen_leader might be optional as not everybody uses gproc_dist.

Thoughts?

@uwiger
Owner
uwiger commented Oct 30, 2012

Sure - just need to decide how best to do that with rebar. Suggestions are welcome. :)

@yrashk
yrashk commented Oct 30, 2012

A lot of people do this by having multiple rebar configs — the main one being the leanest — and for dev/test they have rebar.dev.config, rebar.test.config, etc. Seems to work pretty well!

@uwiger
Owner
uwiger commented Jan 11, 2013

I have pushed an implementation for this in the Feuerlabs fork of gproc:
https://github.com/Feuerlabs/gproc/blob/master/README.md

If this is acceptable, I can push it to the main repos.

@yrashk
yrashk commented Jan 11, 2013

seems okay, a little bit convoluted to my personal taste, but as long as rebar won't build those deps by default, it's all fine

@uwiger
Owner
uwiger commented Jan 11, 2013

For this particular use case, I agree it's a bit convoluted, but I noticed I end up needing dynamic dependency handling in other apps as well, so I am shooting for a reasonably generic approach.

@yrashk
yrashk commented Jan 11, 2013

Either way, I think it is a desirable change that would be nice to have in this repo.

@uwiger
Owner
uwiger commented Jan 11, 2013

Ok then - pushed to HEAD in the uwiger/gproc and esl/gproc repos.

@uwiger uwiger closed this May 24, 2013
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment