Re: [Proposal-ish?] Lua should bind the Lua C API as a Lua module

[Russell Haley <russ.haley@...>]

On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 9:57 AM, Paige DePol <lual@serfnet.org> wrote:
> Russell Haley <russ.haley@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> The mistake is to introduce the term fork where a standard definition
>> has existed for a very long time.  Mr. Henrique de Figueiredo mistake
>> was to apologize where he was correct. Soni has used a slang term -
>> not a definition - for software derivative. Mr.  Henrique de
>> Figueiredo pointed to the standardized definition for software
>> derivatives when referencing Lua.
>>
>> Russ
>
> What term do you mean, Russ? "Software Derivative"?
>
> If so, derivatives are created, either compatible or incompatible with the
> original software, through the process of forking.
>
> In this case Luiz was misusing the term "fork" as the term itself makes no
> assumptions about the compatibility of the resulting software derivative.
> Regardless of whether the resulting code from the fork is compatible or
> incompatible with the original software it is the *act* of creating a copy
> for independent development that defines a fork, not the compatibility of
> the resulting changes.
>
> The key thing here is "independent development" of the original source, if
> the code is forked by the original developers that is called a "branch".
>
> Sometimes forks happen when development teams split, sometimes it is just
> people like me who take a project and create a fork of my own to hack away
> on. Sometimes these derivatives even take over from the original software
> from which they were forked, like the X-Window system, for example.
>
> The process of copying source code and then modifying it is to "fork" the
> project, and in the process create a derivative of the original software. It
> is then up to the original project authors to determine the level of
> compatibility with any deriviatives created. In Lua's case derivatives are
> considered compatible, and the name Lua may be used, if the semantics of the
> language remain unchanged, otherwise it is deemed an incompatible fork and
> the name of the language must be changed.
>
> Over at dictionary.com they have "fork" defined as a verb for this subject:
>
> 15. Digital Technology. To copy (the source code) from a piece of software
> and develop a new version independently, with the result of producing two
> unique pieces of software.
>
> I hope this has helped clarify the usage of the term "fork", which has been
> around a lot longer than Git[1], and how it relates to software derivatives.
>
> ~Paige
>
> [1] On the Wikipedia page for "Fork (Software Development)"[2] it states that
>     the term was used all the way back in 1980 by Eric Allman in relation to
>     creating a branch in the SCCS source control system.
> [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fork_(software_development)
>
>
One of the authors of the code and a senior member of the mailing list
pointed to the standard definition to be used when discussing
derivatives of Lua software. I have pointed to where the discussion
veered into what I consider the mistake of redefining terms for the
sake of redefining terms. If you and Etine consider *that* a mistake,
it is your right (duty?) on the mailing list to state your opinion.
Mine opinion still stands. :)

In-as-neutral-language-as-possible,

Russ