[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index]
[Thread Index]
- Subject: Re: Lua Distributions and Package Management
- From: steve donovan <steve.j.donovan@...>
- Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2013 11:35:04 +0200
On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 10:50 AM, John Hind <john.hind@zen.co.uk> wrote:
> robust build/install procedures that emphasise robustness over speed. It is
> helpful if the package handling system is GUI based rather than command
> line.
It's on the roadmap but unfortunately I keep getting distracted by new
shiny things and the reality of having to make a living ;)
> Bottom line: there is no reason why the end user should notice the
> difference between a binary and a source distribution.
True! Which is why Phillip is praising the built-in backend of LR
(which requires nothing more than a compiler, which is dead easy to
install in Windows these days) and wondering if its goodness could be
separated from the rest of LR.
Where the whole thing starts falling apart is dealing with external
dependencies on Windows ....
It's often been said that Windows could do with a proper package
manager - the closest I've found is chocolatey.org.
steve d.
steve d.
