[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: Re: package managers comparasion
- From: "Pierre Chapuis" <catwell@...>
- Date: Sat, 03 Dec 2016 11:54:19 +0000
December 2, 2016 5:12 PM, "Mikoláš Štrajt" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> 1. How many Lua package managers do we know?
> I came up with these:
> * LuaRocks (https://luarocks.org)
> * LuaDist (http://luadist.org)
> * ULua (http://ulua.io)
> * luapower (https://luapower.com)
> * ActiveLua own's (any info available?)
OpenResty also has its own package manager now: https://opm.openresty.org/
> There are also some lua distributions (http://lua-users.org/wiki/LuaDistributions), but these came
> without package manager.
> * Lua for Windows (https://github.com/rjpcomputing/luaforwindows)
> * LuaAIO (http://luaaio.luaforge.net/index.html)
> * MurgaLua (http://www.murga-projects.com/murgaLua.html)
> * LuaPlus (http://luaplus.org)
> * etc etc
For Windows you may also want to look at luawinmulti,
which uses LuaRocks: https://github.com/Tieske/luawinmulti
In general, I think we (Lua developers) should use LuaRocks.
When we distribute software to end users we should bundle dependencies
with it, or rely on the operating systems' own package managers.
It may make sense for specific ecosystems to have their own package
managers (e.g. OpenResty) although it would probably be better if
they just used a custom LuaRocks tree.
It may also make sense to provide binary builds of C modules for
specific platforms, possibly as LuaRocks packages as well.
But anything that is not designed to work well with LuaRocks is
going to be limited at some point, when users will want to install
packages that it does not provide.