On Monday 18, Norman Clarke 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
> > 
> > 
> > https://github.com/Neopallium/lua-zmq/raw/master/rockspecs/lua-zmq-thread
> > s-1.0-1.rockspec
> > 
> > >> Uploaded, thanks!
> > > 
> > > 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. 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.

Why should we have to change the domain name in the url to make that work?

> 
> 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.

That shouldn't be the case.  Also the only change in the current master branch 
is README file and the API docs (which I should have done before the 1.0 
release).  I just tested "luarocks install lua-zmq" and it is install from a 
tarball hosted on http://luarocks.org/.

Compare the output from this:
luarocks install lua-zmq

to this:
luarocks install https://github.com/Neopallium/lua-
zmq/raw/master/rockspecs/lua-zmq-scm-1.rockspec

The second one will download the latest code from the git master.  You should 
see different output from the two commands.

> 
> I usually do SCM rockspecs first, and then eventually package them as a
> full release later. Not sure if these were added as SCM rockspecs, but
> it's a little confusing to see a version AND a source repo that simply
> points to master rather than a tag.

As I showed above there is a SCM rockspec for lua-zmq.  The 1.0 release 
shouldn't be pointing at the git master branch (just remember there isn't any 
changes to the code yet in the master branch).

I like how simple it is to create a release with just a git tag and one 
rockspec per release.  Instead of a git tag in the "branch" field, it should 
be possible to use the release commit's sha1 hash (which is much more 
immutable then a git tag, just not as pretty).

-- 
Robert G. Jakabosky

_______________________________________________
Luarocks-developers mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.luaforge.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/luarocks-developers

Reply via email to