[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: Re: Lua Foundation?
- From: steve donovan <steve.j.donovan@...>
- Date: Sat, 22 Apr 2017 09:58:50 +0200
On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 6:18 PM, Andrew Starks <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> I think that you're making a great case for the need for an
> organizational structure and then concluding the opposite.
Blame it on stream-of-consciousness thinking ;) Dirk's difficulties
were much in my mind - too many choices, and hard to make those
choices. Documentation remains a problem.
> Also, such an organizing body doBues not need to exclude any modules. It
> could for example say, "These modules are tested and built by the
> organization, conform to its highest standard, do not overlap each
> other, work well together, reasonably follow a specific style and are
> thus a part of a core set.
That's pretty much how Lua for Windows worked, and it did work well.
Just didn't age well, and for largely technical reasons (my favourite
But, an opinionated bunch of people could do this tomorrow. The concern here is,
"how representative are these people?". "Are they Blessed?". But it
is not LabLua's mission to bless community initiatives. I did
appreciate Etiene's contribution because she focused on initiatives
that only a foundation could do - organize events, maybe raise
funding, fly the flag.
> Also, I believe that LuaRocks and LuaDist are a part of the solution.
Of course. Very important work, and in an ideal world Hisham and Peter
should get a grant ;)