On 14 August 2013 10:13, steve donovan <steve.j.dono...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 3:04 PM, Pierre Chapuis <catw...@archlinux.us> > wrote: >> >> strings in the dependencies table so if we allow tables >> to mean alternative dependencies it would not break any >> existing rockspec, would it? > > Hisham checks rockspecs thoroughly, so we can't just sneak in a feature ;)
Yeah, users running older versions of LuaRocks would have problems if we simply add a feature. We'd have to bump the rockspec format version number and specify that in the rockspec, so at least they get a proper error message saying the rockspec is incompatible. > However, it is again time to discuss a new version of the rockspec format. Indeed, and probably time to start a new branch in git and start adding to it! -- Hisham ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 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
