On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 20:20, Norman Clarke <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 10:47, Alexander Gladysh <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 16:57, Norman Clarke <[email protected]> wrote: >> > On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 11:25, Hisham <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 11:44 PM, Robert G. Jakabosky >> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >> > https://github.com/Neopallium/lua-zmq/raw/master/rockspecs/lua-zmq-1.0-1.rockspec >> > Shouldn't versioned rockspecs point to an archive rather than the Git >> > repo? >> LuaRocks is unable to download archives from GitHub.\ > I'm not sure if we're talking about the same thing. I load archives to > Github for LR all the time. Preparing archives by hand is a lot of extra work. > See the rockspec for Telescope: > https://github.com/norman/telescope/blob/master/rockspecs/telescope-0.4.0-1.rockspec > All you have to do is change the host to the download permalink to > "cloud.github.com" and it works fine. See above. IMO, LuaRocks should be fixed to support GitHub auto-downloads. > The problem that I think I see with the one here (and of course I may be > mistaken) is that if I do luarocks install "lua-zmq" today, I get the > current Git master, which might change tomorrow. So 1.0 on my machine may > have different code than 1.0 on yours, and that's less than ideal. No, it would not. For two reasons: 1. See branch parameter in the rockspec source: source = { url = "git://github.com/Neopallium/lua-zmq.git", branch = "v1.0", } It actually points at Git tag, and tags in Git are immutable (well, actually they are not, but changing them is a really bad idea). 2. As I mentioned in my previous post, when rockspecs are published, rocks are repacked and uploaded to the LuaRocks host. LuaRocks do not attempt to access GitHub when you do luarocks install <name>. Alexander. _______________________________________________ Luarocks-developers mailing list [email protected] http://lists.luaforge.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/luarocks-developers
