Re: Regarding lua bugs and the lua tarball download

[Rena <hyperhacker@...>]

On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 4:06 PM, Craig Barnes <craigbarnes85@gmail.com> wrote:

On 11 October 2013 19:40, Hisham <h@hisham.hm> wrote:
> Distro packagers usually already include bugfix patches in their
> binary builds anyway. Posting patch files under "canonical" URLs in
> the official page makes it easier for downstream (distro) packagers to
> reference which patches they are applying; I think it would be a
> welcome addition.
>

If it was done in grouped patches, similar to how Mike Pall does it
for LuaJIT, then I agree. If someone reports a bug, you can give such
a thing a name, e.g. "LuaJIT 2.0.1 hotfix#1". That's mostly the same
thing as a release though. What name would you give to Lua 5.2.2 with
(hypothetical) patches A, B C, D, F, J, X and Z applied?

Patching distro packages mostly exists out of necessity, not because
it's something to aspire to.

Sorry, mis-sent.

I'd call it "broken" because it doesn't have other known bug fixes applied.

--
Sent from my Game Boy.