On Sat, May 7, 2011 at 9:22 PM, Hisham <[email protected]> wrote: > (What's the best > approach? Commit them in the main trunk and make a "stable" branch or > the other way around?).
Seems like this is the first question to answer; both ways make sense! First priority is those compatible extensions and generalizations, as you say. I suspect that rockspec vs 2.0 can seen be a 'superset' of vs 1.0. IMHO a new rockspec format should allow more flexibility in specifying external dependencies. Not easy, because we remain very cross-platform. Windows is a particularly hairy case because there are no well-known repository managers to tap into. Dare I say it, but perhaps we can leverage the work of LuaDist in providing cross-platform builds for a number of common non-Lua libraries.? My experiments with a Lake back-end are one attempt to extend rockspecs from within, by allowing things like embedding imperative Lua in rockspecs. (In fact, one doesn't need Lake for that - it would not be difficult to run Lua scripts as post-install and pre-install [1] actions.) steve d. [1] the hook is there, it just isn't currently used. _______________________________________________ Luarocks-developers mailing list [email protected] http://lists.luaforge.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/luarocks-developers
