I see, thanks! Will think/investigate this more and return when having more 
detailed proposal and justification
wtorek, 7 marca 2023 o 18:00:05 UTC+1 José Valim napisał(a):

> > Also, user doesn't have to think about versions as it includes only one 
> dependency so it won't try to plug webrtc endpoint that is incompatible 
> with engine.
>
> FWIW, this can be easily addressed by recommending users to add 
> {:membrane_plugin, ">= 0.0.0"}, since membrane itself will already restrict 
> it to a supported version.
>
> At the end of the day, if the goal is replacing 3 lines:
>
> {:membrane_rtc_engine_webrtc, ..}
> {:membrane_rtc_engine_hls, ...}
> {:membrane_rtc_engine_recorder, ...}
>
> with:
>
>
> {:membrane_rtc_engine, "~> 0.10.0", features: [:webrtc, :hls, :recorder]} 
>
> I have to say this is likely not worth it, given the amount of work 
> implementing and maintaining this feature would entail in the long term.
>
> I understand why Rust has this feature: compile-time and artefacts are 
> much larger there. Plus the fact they can't metaprogram at the file level 
> like us means they need explicit configuration for this. So before moving 
> on, I think you need to send a more structured proposal, with the problem 
> this is going to address, code snippets before and after, and so on. As 
> mentioned above, this is a complex feature, so the benefits need to be 
> really well justified over what can already be achieved today.
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 7, 2023 at 5:06 PM Michal Śledź <michal...@swmansion.com> 
> wrote:
>
>> > I understand better now. To make the issue concise, you would like to 
>> programmatically include optional dependencies. Today everything is based 
>> on the dependency name itself but you would like to have an abstraction 
>> layer for controlling it.
>>
>> Yes, exactly! 
>>
>> > One potential workaround that you have is to define dependencies to 
>> work as flags. Let's say you have a realtime feature that requires 3 
>> dependencies, you can define an optional "membrane_realtime_feature"  
>> package that, once included, signals the existance of a feature and also 
>> all of its dependencies. Alghouth it is most likely not a good idea to 
>> abuse dependencies in this way.
>>
>> That's what we were thinking about too. In general, we know in the 
>> compile time which features we are going to need. At the end, user has to 
>> plug specific endpoints to the Engine on its own. For example:
>>
>> {:ok, pid} = Membrane.RTC.Engine.start_link() 
>> Engine.add_endpoint(pid, %HLS{})
>> Engine.add_endpoint(pid, %WebRTC{})
>> Engine.add_endpoint(pid, %VideoRecorder{})
>> etc.
>>
>> so in general, we could exctract each endpoint (WebRTC, HLS, Recorder) 
>> into a separate package and I belive this is a pretty elegant solution. 
>>
>> We would end up with:
>>
>> {:membrane_rtc_engine, ...}
>> {:membrane_rtc_engine_webrtc, ..}
>> {:membrane_rtc_engine_hls, ...}
>> {:membrane_rtc_engine_recorder, ...}
>>
>> However, allowing user to do 
>>
>> {:membrane_rtc_engine, "~> 0.10.0", features: [:webrtc, :hls, :recorder]} 
>>
>> looks even more attractive to me, and is easier to document as we can 
>> list all of supported features in the membrane_rtc_engine docs. Also, user 
>> doesn't have to think about versions as it includes only one dependency so 
>> it won't try to plug webrtc endpoint that is incompatible with engine.
>>
>> Regarding:
>>
>> > I think the biggest concern with implementing this feature is that it 
>> needs to be part of Hex itself. So the first discussion is if and how to 
>> extend the Hex registry to incorporate this metadata, which needs to happen 
>> in Hex first.
>>
>> and
>>
>> > In this case, as long as the feature checks are only inclusive, it 
>> should be fine. But you can also think if a library named A assumes that 
>> dependency C is compiled without some flag, and library B assumes C is 
>> compiled with said flag, you will end up with conflicting behaviour.
>>
>> I don't have answers to those questions but I am willing to investigate 
>> them and propose more detailed analysis on how we could implement the whole 
>> concept assuming it sounds valid to you. 
>>
>> wtorek, 7 marca 2023 o 16:34:50 UTC+1 José Valim napisał(a):
>>
>>> I understand better now. To make the issue concise, you would like to 
>>> programmatically include optional dependencies. Today everything is based 
>>> on the dependency name itself but you would like to have an abstraction 
>>> layer for controlling it.
>>>
>>> I think the biggest concern with implementing this feature is that it 
>>> needs to be part of Hex itself. So the first discussion is if and how to 
>>> extend the Hex registry to incorporate this metadata, which needs to happen 
>>> in Hex first.
>>>
>>> > I also thought that configuring libraries via Application environment 
>>> is discouraged, according to
>>>  
>>> https://hexdocs.pm/elixir/library-guidelines.html#avoid-application-configuration
>>>  
>>> <https://hexdocs.pm/elixir/library-guidelines.html#avoid-application-configuration>
>>>
>>> Right. Application configuration has many downsides, exactly because it 
>>> is global. The feature mechanism is also global, regardless if we put it on 
>>> mix.exs or on the configuration environment. Rust also hints it is 
>>> configuration (the conditional is called cfg):
>>>
>>> #[cfg(feature = "webp")]pub mod webp;
>>>
>>> In this case, as long as the feature checks are only inclusive, it 
>>> should be fine. But you can also think if a library named A assumes that 
>>> dependency C is compiled without some flag, and library B assumes C is 
>>> compiled with said flag, you will end up with conflicting behaviour.
>>>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> One potential workaround that you have is to define dependencies to work 
>>> as flags. Let's say you have a realtime feature that requires 3 
>>> dependencies, you can define an optional "membrane_realtime_feature"  
>>> package that, once included, signals the existance of a feature and also 
>>> all of its dependencies. Alghouth it is most likely not a good idea to 
>>> abuse dependencies in this way.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Mar 7, 2023 at 4:17 PM Michal Śledź <michal...@swmansion.com> 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> 2. Users of a library with optional dependencies have to include all 
>>>> optional dependencies in their mix.exs
>>>> I meant that to enable one feature, user has to include a lot of 
>>>> optional dependencies, at least in our case.
>>>>
>>>> 3. Users might include bad varsions of optional dependencies
>>>> Here, I meant that user has to exactly know dependency version that has 
>>>> to be included. In our case, when there is a lot of optional dependencies, 
>>>> it starts getting annoying to keep them up to date in the docs. 
>>>>
>>>> Other than that, you should be able to provide this functionality using 
>>>> config/config.exs files and the Application.compile_env/2.
>>>> But I cannot manipulate which deps should be downloaded and compiled 
>>>> using Application.compile_env, can I? I mean, user still has to include 
>>>> all 
>>>> needed dependencies and know their correct versions. I also thought that 
>>>> configuring libraries via Application environment is discouraged, 
>>>> according 
>>>> to
>>>>  
>>>> https://hexdocs.pm/elixir/library-guidelines.html#avoid-application-configuration
>>>>  
>>>> <https://hexdocs.pm/elixir/library-guidelines.html#avoid-application-configuration>
>>>>
>>>> We very often depend on native libraries written in C like ffmpeg. When 
>>>> it's possible, we make those components optional, so that user is not 
>>>> forced to install uneeded native libraries on their system. 
>>>>
>>>> I feel like at the moment user has to be aware of which optional deps 
>>>> are needed to get the desired feature. What I would like to have is to 
>>>> focus on the feature itself, leaving deps and their versions to library 
>>>> maintainers.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  
>>>>
>>>> wtorek, 7 marca 2023 o 14:45:03 UTC+1 José Valim napisał(a):
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Michał,
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for the proposal. Your initial description makes me think there 
>>>>> may exist bugs which we would need to investigate first.
>>>>>
>>>>> 2. Users of a library with optional dependencies have to include all 
>>>>> optional dependencies in their mix.exs
>>>>>
>>>>> This should not be required. You only need to include the dependencies 
>>>>> that you need, which would be equivalent to opting into a feature in Rust.
>>>>>
>>>>> 3. Users might include bad varsions of optional dependencies
>>>>>
>>>>> This should not be possible. The requirement has to match for optional 
>>>>> dependencies.
>>>>>
>>>>> If the above is not true, please provide more context.
>>>>>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>
>>>>> Other than that, you should be able to provide this functionality 
>>>>> using config/config.exs files and the Application.compile_env/2. In fact, 
>>>>> I 
>>>>> think introducing another mechanism to configure libraries could end-up 
>>>>> adding more confusion, especially given how configs changed (and also 
>>>>> improved) throughout the years.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Mar 7, 2023 at 12:40 PM Michal Śledź <michal...@swmansion.com> 
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Currently, using optional dependencies is quite inconvenient and 
>>>>>> error prone:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1. A lot of modules have to use if Code.ensure_loaded statements 
>>>>>> introducing additional nesting
>>>>>> 2. Users of a library with optional dependencies have to include all 
>>>>>> optional dependencies in their mix.exs
>>>>>> 3. Users might include bad varsions of optional dependencies
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My proposal is to enhance API for optional dependencies basing on the 
>>>>>> API provided by Cargo in Rust.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The main idea is that the user of a library with optional 
>>>>>> dependencies specify which "features" it is willing to have. For 
>>>>>> example, 
>>>>>> in membrane_rtc_engine library, which allows you to exchange audio/video 
>>>>>> using different multimedia protocols, we have a lot of optional 
>>>>>> dependencies depending on what protocol the user is willing to use. When 
>>>>>> the user wants to receive media via webrtc and convert it to the HLS to 
>>>>>> broadcast it to the broader audience it has to include all of those 
>>>>>> dependencies
>>>>>>
>>>>>>    # Optional deps for HLS endpoint
>>>>>>    {:membrane_aac_plugin, "~> 0.13.0", optional: true},
>>>>>>    {:membrane_opus_plugin, "~> 0.16.0", optional: true},
>>>>>>    {:membrane_aac_fdk_plugin, "~> 0.14.0", optional: true},
>>>>>>    {:membrane_generator_plugin, "~> 0.8.0", optional: true},
>>>>>>    {:membrane_realtimer_plugin, "~> 0.6.0", optional: true},
>>>>>>    {:membrane_audio_mix_plugin, "~> 0.12.0", optional: true},
>>>>>>    {:membrane_raw_audio_format, "~> 0.10.0", optional: true},
>>>>>>    {:membrane_h264_ffmpeg_plugin, "~> 0.25.2", optional: true},
>>>>>>    {:membrane_audio_filler_plugin, "~> 0.1.0", optional: true},
>>>>>>    {:membrane_video_compositor_plugin, "~> 0.2.1", optional: true},
>>>>>>    {:membrane_http_adaptive_stream_plugin, "~> 0.11.0", optional: 
>>>>>> true},
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Instead of this, I would love to say to the user, hi if you want to 
>>>>>> use HLS just specify it in the feature list. For example:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> {:membrane_rtc_engine, "~> 0.10.0", features: [:hls]}
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It would also be nice to somehow get rid of "if Code.ensure_loaded" 
>>>>>> statements. I am not sure how yet but Rust do this that way
>>>>>>
>>>>>> // This conditionally includes a module which implements WEBP support. 
>>>>>> #[cfg(feature 
>>>>>> = "webp")] pub mod webp;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What comes to my mind is that in mix.exs we can specify "features", 
>>>>>> their dependencies and a list of modules. When someone asks for the 
>>>>>> feature, those dependencies are autmatically downloaded and listed 
>>>>>> modules 
>>>>>> are compiled. 
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The final proposal is:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> # library side
>>>>>> # mix.exs
>>>>>>
>>>>>> features: [
>>>>>>   hls: [
>>>>>>     dependencies: [],
>>>>>>     modules: []
>>>>>>   ]
>>>>>> ]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> # user side
>>>>>> # mix.exs
>>>>>>
>>>>>> {:membrane_rtc_engine, "~> 0.10.0", features: [:hls]}
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I would love to help in implementing those features if you decide 
>>>>>> they are valuable
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Rust reference:
>>>>>> https://doc.rust-lang.org/cargo/reference/features.html#features
>>>>>>  
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
>>>>>> Groups "elixir-lang-core" group.
>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, 
>>>>>> send an email to elixir-lang-co...@googlegroups.com.
>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elixir-lang-core/8385965e-799d-4cea-bcd5-151d9fee6914n%40googlegroups.com
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elixir-lang-core/8385965e-799d-4cea-bcd5-151d9fee6914n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>>>>> .
>>>>>>
>>>>> -- 
>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
>>>> Groups "elixir-lang-core" group.
>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send 
>>>> an email to elixir-lang-co...@googlegroups.com.
>>>>
>>> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elixir-lang-core/d88a5141-86d8-42b8-ae61-71cf58d644a0n%40googlegroups.com
>>>>  
>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elixir-lang-core/d88a5141-86d8-42b8-ae61-71cf58d644a0n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>>> .
>>>>
>>> -- 
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>> "elixir-lang-core" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
>> email to elixir-lang-co...@googlegroups.com.
>>
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elixir-lang-core/a0f6ba5c-1a50-4637-90c9-c3968b443377n%40googlegroups.com
>>  
>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elixir-lang-core/a0f6ba5c-1a50-4637-90c9-c3968b443377n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>> .
>>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"elixir-lang-core" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to elixir-lang-core+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elixir-lang-core/a1733e94-9cee-4a54-8e86-ce1da05e25a9n%40googlegroups.com.

Reply via email to