[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: Re: new releases [was Re: Official public code repository]
- From: Stephen Kellett <lua@...>
- Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2007 23:35:07 +0000
Tim Kelly wrote:
When trying to pitch a solution based on Lua, or any technology, management decision-makers raise the
>question regarding the long-term viability, especially against PHP or
Perl. It's perverse mentality, to be
>honest. You state you are happy with Lua and suggest little changes
will occur in the future
>(which is a good thing); management sees this lack of constant updates
as a possibility the project will
>go away, or worse, ...
That doesn't make sense. Management (the type you are describing, at
least) are pragmatists. They look for:
1 Proof that it works (others are using it, successfully)
2 Stability - no radical changes to language in the near future. Lack of
bugs indicates maturity.
3 That nothing is going to change (technology, platform, licensing,
etc), unduly, for the future (part of stability).
4 "Support" will be there in the future. Where "Support" means
commercial, consulting, newsgroups, mail lists, ongoing development
whatever is appropriate. No one wants to end in a dead-end.
1, 2, 3 fit their criteria.
For commercial products, then 4 is an issue, but Lua is available at no
cost, with the source, so you can ensure that (4) is handled in house
should the initial source (Roberto et al) disappear. So may be 10 or 20
years into the future (4) may be an issue, should Roberto and the
community disappear. But even if Roberto gets a job doing something more
interesting, the community is still there to drive it forward. You only
have to look at the other language communities for Perl, Python and
Ruby. The initial guy is still there, but the community is ready to pick
up the baton and run with it should they need to. I see no reason why
that isn't the case with Lua.
I've just been reading Robert A Moore's "Inside the Tornado" which is a
technology roadmap book. Excellent insight into what makes certain
products dominate markets and other fail to dominate, even when they are
good products. The main reason for replying to this thread. Your
pragmatist managers understand 1, 2, 3, but fail to understand (4) is
satisfied because they don't understand open-source means they can
prevent failure themselves (where failure in commercial terms would mean
So, as a slight aside, I highly recommend a visit to Amazon/Barnes and
Noble/etc to purchase a good book, which even if you are not a business
owner/entrepreneur, may open your eyes to a different way of looking at
Without the aside, I suggest you explain to them they are misguided in
their concern for lack of development (in their eyes). That is a good
thing. As is the fact they can take it in house if they need to. You
might also want to point out the use of Lua by large corporates such as
Adobe (Lightroom) and the World of Warcraft people.
(*) Yes, I'm overly simplifying, no flames please, I know its not that