> I asked a similar question a while back: > http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_id=30554922 > > Basically, the only way to support alternative dependencies is to > create a rockspec for each set of dependencies like lrexlib does for > its various backends.
Argh. Thank you, I must have skipped this thread... In it spc proposes the same solution as me and Hisham replies it would be "incompatible". I do not understand why: afaik currently the rockspec format only allows strings in the dependencies table so if we allow tables to mean alternative dependencies it would not break any existing rockspec, would it? -- Pierre Chapuis ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Get 100% visibility into Java/.NET code with AppDynamics Lite! It's a free troubleshooting tool designed for production. Get down to code-level detail for bottlenecks, with <2% overhead. Download for free and get started troubleshooting in minutes. http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=48897031&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ Luarocks-developers mailing list Luarocks-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/luarocks-developers
