[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: Re: Lua Ecosystem
- From: steve donovan <steve.j.donovan@...>
- Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 10:09:07 +0200
On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 9:47 AM, Pierre Chapuis <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Currently, no, there is moderation. Unlike most other
> languages, to submit a rock, you notify a mailing list
> and Hisham adds it to the repository.
Leaf has an alternative repo (moonrocks) where anyone can do this, but
it's obviously open to abuse...
> No, see above.
Unless the would-be maintainer has made a good effort to contact the
original author. If MIA, then maybe yes.
> I don't really want -1, I think most people wouldn't use
> it and it could result in pointless fights if used.
> I don't think this is a good idea. Requiring require
> to return *something* (usually a table), why not.
I'm with Pierre here; this is the principle of 'least surprise'
Exceptions to the 'returns table' rule are useful, but must be clearly
documented, including the potential 'callability' of a table.
I think we have to accept the situation where the project name is not
a good indicator of the require name. So a suggestion for lua-toolbox
is to collect the module name/namespace and present them next to the
project name. Then a search function can answer the question 'what
packages provide 'uuid'?.
This feels like a job for crowd-outsourcing ;)