On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 12:55 PM, steve donovan <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 5:21 PM, Hisham <[email protected]> wrote: >> Speaking of this, I don't if people actually use the 'unpack' and >> 'make' commands much. From the feedback I gathered over time, it seems >> the interface for these commands needs to be reviewed if LuaRocks >> wants to be useful as a make replacement for simple Lua modules. > > I tend to use unpack/make when something goes wrong ;) LR's roll-back > can be a little irritating there because it's thrown away the tarball > after an error. > > Also, 'make' is certainly part of the development cycle. > > Does LR want to be a make replacerment? I've certainly felt the need > sometimes, when writing yet another little makefile.
I'm not sure, but unpack/make are timid steps in that direction. These days Norman Clarke wrote on Twitter "At what point should you stop adding features to software? Infinite growth isn't sustainable.", to which I replied "I guess after a point you only keep adding features if you shift away from the project's original goal." I don't want to turn LuaRocks into a make/CMake/etc. competitor, but I'd like to make the life of those using type="builtin" to be as easy as possible so you don't have to use a make-type tool if you're just shipping a couple of files. In other words, I don't feel the need to make this build type support more use cases than it currently does. -- Hisham _______________________________________________ Luarocks-developers mailing list [email protected] http://lists.luaforge.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/luarocks-developers
