[Bug 1309525] New: Bump up Elixir version

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1309525

Bug ID: 1309525
           Summary: Bump up Elixir version
           Product: Fedora EPEL
           Version: epel7
         Component: elixir
          Assignee: [e-mail]
          Reporter: [e-mail]
        QA Contact: [e-mail]
                CC: [e-mail],
                    [e-mail], [e-mail],
                    [e-mail], [e-mail],
                    [e-mail]

Current EPEL package for Elixir is using version 0.12 [1]
This is quite behind, 
Effectively latest stable version of Elixir is 1.2.2 [2]

Dependent projects like Phoenix depends on more recent version of Elixir.
Elixir is a relatively young language which is moving fast.

[1] http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/7/x86_64/repoview/elixir.html
[2]
dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/fedora/linux/development/rawhide/x86_64/os/Packages/e/elixir-1.2.2-1.fc24.noarch.rpm

[Bug 1309525] Bump up Elixir version

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1309525

--- Comment #1 from Martin Langhoff  ---
Elixir 1.2.x depends on Erlang 18, which is not on EL7. Heck it is not even on
F23 :-/

Getting Erlang 18 on EL7 requires a full bootstrap of the Erlang 18 set of
packages, that's nontrivial and probably risks breakage. Maybe an SCL is a
better fit.

I have a personal repo with Erlang 18 and Elixir 1.2.2 for EL7, it is a mix of
rebuilt and straight F23/rawhide packages for the Erlang suite. It works but is
not supportable. See http://dev.laptop.org/~martin/erlang-18.2.2-el7/ and
http://dev.laptop.org/~martin/elixir-1.2.x-el7/

Building a high quality Erlang 18 set of packages for EL7 (maybe via SCL) is
beyond my abilities and time constraints, but I'd be happy to help someone with
Erlang bootstrapping experience. Once that's built, then Elixir is trivial.

[Bug 1309525] Bump up Elixir version

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1309525

Randy Barlow  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |[e-mail]

--- Comment #2 from Randy Barlow  ---
I agree with Martin, we can't break backwards compatibility. Perhaps copr would
be a good place to do something like this?

FWIW, I'm very excited about the Erlang stack in the upcoming F24 release!

[Bug 1309525] Bump up Elixir version

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1309525

--- Comment #3 from Martin Langhoff  ---
More than happy to lend a hand. Will need help on a proper Erlang 18 bootstrap.
I made an initial attempt but there's circular deps, and I don't know what
tooling and process was used in the v17->v18 process.

Without some tooling support, it's a pita to run bootstraps, I have jury-rigged
my mock roots to access an "in progress" repo but its rather awkward.

I am super excited as well with Erlang 18 on F24 and I am working with some
very interesting customer projects based on Elixir. This stack has wings.

[Bug 1309525] Bump up Elixir version

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1309525

Gilles Dubreuil  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Depends On|                            |1309523

Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1309523
[Bug 1309523] Bump up Erlang version

[Bug 1309525] Bump up Elixir version

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1309525

Ricky Elrod  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |CLOSED
         Resolution|---                         |CANTFIX
        Last Closed|                            |2017-01-02 21:26:27

--- Comment #4 from Ricky Elrod  ---
I'm going to close this as CANTFIX to bump it out of my queue for now. I don't
think there's anything I can do here in terms of a version bump in EPEL given
the Erlang version requirement and the backwards compatibility issues. I agree
that COPR is probably the best place to pursue this.