0x6e6562 at gmail.com
Sat Nov 8 17:38:26 GMT 2008
On Sat, Nov 8, 2008 at 3:41 PM, Holger Hoffstätte <holger at wizards.de> wrote:
> As I indicated in an exchange with Hubert (Oct.19, also on the internal
> list) I can take care of the Gentoo "packaging", which would consist of a
> small project in the publicly accessible Rabbit hg repo, which users can
> then add to their local list of installation sources. See my mail to
> Hubert for details. There's no real packaging going on, since it just uses
> the existing generic Unix tarball for installation. Could also easily do
> the same for the client libs or shovel.
FTR, this is an excerpt of what Holger wrote to Hubert:
That's exactly what I had in mind. Is there some urgent need for the
Gentoo packaging? ebuilds are either in the official package database
("portage", http://packages.gentoo.org/) or can be added to a
overlay infrastucture of additional mini-repos from the community
("overlays"). These can be added to a client machine's package
via "layman" (http://layman.sourceforge.net/), the overlay manager. It
might make sense to host a Rabbit overlay in LShift's hg repo, which
then contain all related ebuilds. I briefly looked into making a
for the erlang client but wanted to wait until stable binary packages
available, otherwise I'd have to mess around with eUnit for
and test phase and whatnot.
IMHO, Hubert should have cc'ed the Rabbit list instead of our internal
list - there is too much information on the internal list that should
really be public :-(
As for your suggestion, I think it would be coolest if that were in
portage, but of course, somebody has to maintain it.
As for using a repo on RabbitMQ com, I don't know if that's such a
good idea (bureaucratic overhead) and maybe it is unnecessary,
something like bitbucket could do the trick as well.
> Does Windows really require a full-blown installer? It might be easier to
> simply offer a zip and require installing the stock Erlang runtime package
> separately, maybe with a hint to version compatibility or recommendation.
> It's not *that* hard.
Holger, you're preaching to the converted, especially being somebody
who has never installed Rabbit themselves.
But personally I've only run Rabbit on BSD, Arch and OSX, so I am not
the right person to judge the ease of use from a Windows developer's
I have received a few comments here and there that surround Windows installers.
So if there is somebody who runs Rabbit on Windows who thinks an
installer would be a good idea, may they step forward.
More information about the rabbitmq-discuss