Re: Degenerative discussions (maybe he's right?)

[David Manura <dm.lua@...>]

Asko Kauppi writes:
> There's two things. There's Lua core, which hardly needs caring for  
> and asking for roadmaps on it is -well- valid, but not maybe hitting  
> the end of the nail....Then there's the Lua 2nd tier, modules.
> These are in more or less constant flux...Comparisons of keeping up
> with Lua and Python become essentially the same if the 2nd tier is
> also included in the concept....what are we going to do about it?

http://lua-users.org/wiki/FeatureProposals is much in need of maintenance but
provides some representation of direction (as in "cement roadmap") from a wider
user/community point of view.

It maybe should be stressed that the responsibility of the core Lua team in
Lua's direction is mainly assumed to be in publishing the ANSI C reference
implementation on lua.org.  A tier just above that, managed by independent
entities, provides deployment and non-ANSI ports continually in flux:
LuaBinaries, pkg-lua (debian), LuaRocks, and LuaJIT (and maybe ActiveState will
offer a distribution someday).  The third tier is then the modules and docs
under revision control of LuaForge/Lua-users.  Obviously, many of us want more
cohesive and rigorous second+third tiers, and I see much cooperation in that
direction.