lua-users home
lua-l archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

On 10/26/2011 11:01 AM, Dirk Laurie wrote:
Postings involving the following circle of ideas often appear on the list.

- Lua has no officially blessed library with hundreds of add-ons like
Python does.
- The initial exposure to Lua includes no WOW! graphics and/or sound
- The Lua interactive shell is very primitive compared to {ipython,…} — no GUI
   for program development.

There are at least three big projects in the direction of standard
module libraries:
Kepler, stdlib and Penlight.  There is at least one project in the direction of
synchronized module management: Luarocks.  There is the LfW collection for
Windows.  But none of them is 'official'.

What the community needs (maybe) is a sort of overall design and quaiity control
of module libraries.  Near-universal acknowledgment that a particular set of
modules, as painless to install on all platforms as is Lua itself, is canonical.

It is quite clear that we must not expect the Lua team to deal with
these issues.
Luiz and Roberto have both put substantial Lua add-ons on their sites with no
attempt to make them part of the 'official' Lua distribution.  Their task is to
keep the Lua core lean and healthy, and very well they do it too.

There have been suggestions of appointing a BDFL for overseeing a Lua module
library, all candidates however turning down the honour.

Now we have seen a development management model that works well: the one
in action for Lua itself.  A triumvirate of individuals with different
but compatible
talents.  A conservative policy of requiring unanimity before a
feature is added.

By contrast, most [ANN] items on lua-l are one-man efforts.  Sometimes, as in
the case of LuaJIT, that one man is a superman, but many others are pet projects
that die within a year.

Suppose there were similar triumvirates for module libraries, with a similar
conservative policy.  Maybe the reluctant BDFL's would be willing to shoulder
this shared responsibilty.  Then we might, we just might, see some consensus
emerging on which libraries are the one every Lua programmer should turn
to first.

(who had a spare half-hour between knocking off work and supper)

I would love to see something like this.

This is open source. If somebody puts out there code with appropriate open source license then there code is usable. And if somebody else assembles a distribution of the disparate sources of code, then we have a full featured option for people who are looking for such.

People who come to Lua from Python, Ruby, Perl, ... are often going to attempt to do things they are used to doing in their present favorite language. The more obstacles we put between them and productivity, then they will be less likely to use Lua. They will also be more prone to possible complaints or another round of emails to the list.

Many of us who would like to use Lua, but are not yet of sufficient knowledge or skills. We are not qualified to determine quality of libraries and code to include in such a distribution. But if some who is, started such a distribution and built a community around it. Then we could have capable, qualified decision makers on what goes in and what does not.

It is like Linux distributions. There were a lot of distributions already when Ubuntu first came out. But it became a phenomenal success. And a lot of distributions have been created after.

I don't understand communities where everybody has to do what everybody else has already done, simply because it was easy to do. Ugh!

We have more productive things to do than to recreate, (write/build) the wheel. Many of us don't have the skills to create certain things, but do have the skills to use them when created.

I would love to see a Lua community get behind the building of a full featured distribution and do some interesting things. Build upon it, build with it.

Lets build something together, instead each building their own.

Way past my 2cents.

Jimmie Houchin