Panu Matilainen wrote:
On Fri, 4 Apr 2008, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
>> On Fri, 2008-04-04 at 13:29 -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
>>> I see a few Lua packages have appeared in the review queue today.
>>> I checked out the specs and they all seem very clean. There are a few
>>> issues (/usr/lib/lua seems to be unowned in rawhide, although
>>> /usr/lib/lua/5.1 is owned by the lua package), the luasql packages
>>> leave /usr/lib/lua/5.1/luasql unowned, etc.) but these seem to be
>>> minor packaging issues.
>>> So, we need to decide whether we want to just go ahead with these
>>> packages, or whether we want to do the "wait for guidelines" game
>>> again. Is anyone interesting in writing some guidleines? It seems
>>> like they'd be pretty tiny. Hans, the main Lua package seems to be
>>> yours; are you interested in putting something together?
>> I don't see a reason for a hold here. I would love to see Hans (or
>> someone qualified) whip up some guidelines.
> I also don't see a reason for a hold. As for me being the lua
> maintainer, thats only because it got orphaned and its used in a few
> games I maintain. My lua knowledge is limited. So lets first see how
> these new packages go, and if there is a need for lua specific
> guidelines at all.
Only noticed this now, duh...
I briefly maintained Lua in fedora.us and would be happy to help with it
if you want. Both rpm and apt-rpm have and use an embedded Lua
interpreter to varying degrees so I've both interest and some experience
I've just "given away" a whole bunch of packages to other to lighten my load
bit including lua, lua is now in the capable hands of Tim Niemueller (timn),
I'm sure he will welcome co-maintainers, so if you want to comaintain lua you
should ask him.
I don't see rpm requiring lua in any way, perhaps it would be better for rpm to
be build against the system version of lua instead of using its own private copy?