4 ms·

So hang on. "We had to customize Lua, but didn't contribute all those changes back upstream"? Or "We tried to contribute those changes upstream but Lua didn't w

So hang on. "We had to customize Lua, but didn't contribute all those changes back upstream"? Or "We tried to contribute those changes upstream but Lua didn't want to take them onboard"?

samatman 2y ago
PUC Lua uses a closed development model. They have a small team, and that team both decides what goes into the language, and writes the implementation themselves. There are a great many implementations of Lua at this point, I'm aware of at least six. But Roblox upstreaming their semantic changes was never an option.
- CobrastanJorji 2y ago
  PUC's Lua is, however, open source (https://www.lua.org/license.html https://www.lua.org/license.html), even if they don't solicit contributions, and they do accept happily accept financial support. It doesn't look like they release new versions very frequently at all (the last release was in over a year ago). Still, it appears they do accept financial contributions, so it seems like Roblox, whose market cap is $22 billion and whose offerings are at present entirely dependent on Lua, should probably consider offering at least token support (https://www.lua.org/thanks.html https://www.lua.org/thanks.html).
  - imachine1980_ 2y ago
    Why does the market cap allow you to decide about other people's projects? Lua is used in many places, and its users aren't all employees of Roblox. Lua is popular because it works in a way that sometimes breaks backward compatibility, making the language as easy and lean as it is. If there's a disagreement on how it should be used, just fork it like Roblox did.
- TheRealPomax 2y ago
  Of course it was: there is nothing preventing a company from contacting the dev team and going "we've one quite a bit of work, are you interested in getting any of that upstreamed". Getting changes upstreamed is in no way the exclusive domain of fully open source projects, it just requires reaching out. Just because there's a closed development model doesn't automatically imply the devs team lives and breathes "not-invented-here"-ism and are no interested in discussing improvements that make a difference to actual people using Lua in (extremely) large real world products.
  - samatman 2y ago
    It was not a general statement, but rather, a specific one. > Lua is not "open developed". The development is done exclusively by the Lua team, at PUC-Rio. So, we do not need a SVN repository. Currently, we keep Lua with the good old RCS. - Roberto Ierusalimschy http://lua-users.org/lists/lua-l/2007-09/msg00476.html http://lua-users.org/lists/lua-l/2007-09/msg00476.html
    - TheRealPomax 2y ago
      Yes, I know, that was my point too: it's closed development and so you can talk to the dev team to get changes worked into Lua itself. You don't get to just open a PR and start thigns that way, you have to talk to people. And going "well we didn't contact them" when you're the size of Roblox would be incredible.
      - drekipus 2y ago
        > The development is done exclusively by the Lua team, at PUC-Rio. So, we do not need a SVN repository. If I had this as my message, and someone asked to ship changes, I would be more than mad. just take the L dude.
        TheRealPomax 2y ago
        What a ridiculous thing to say. If you ran, or were part of, an academically run project, "you'd get mad" if a huge industry player went "hey we did some stuff with your project, some of it might be interesting to you, want to chat about potential upstreaming?" really, dude?
        drekipus 2y ago
        Yes, because that is more burden to ensure that it still fits my purpose, the intended goals, and that whoever it is, is doing it properly. Which would be the whole reason I would put such a statement there, in the first place. What are you even trying to argue with now? That I'm not allowed to get angry in the hypothetical that I made up? Do you see why it's fruitless to continue arguing? Or are you going to pick out some prior wording and analyse it further, because you just can't comprehend that corporations don't have best interests at heart, and some people prefer to just put things up and not deal with other people's improvements
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

So hang on. "We had to customize Lua, but didn't contribute all those changes back upstream"? Or "We tried to contribute those changes upstream but Lua didn't want to take them onboard"?

samatman 2y ago

PUC Lua uses a closed development model. They have a small team, and that team both decides what goes into the language, and writes the implementation themselves. There are a great many implementations of Lua at this point, I'm aware of at least six. But Roblox upstreaming their semantic changes was never an option.

CobrastanJorji 2y ago
PUC's Lua is, however, open source (https://www.lua.org/license.html https://www.lua.org/license.html), even if they don't solicit contributions, and they do accept happily accept financial support. It doesn't look like they release new versions very frequently at all (the last release was in over a year ago). Still, it appears they do accept financial contributions, so it seems like Roblox, whose market cap is $22 billion and whose offerings are at present entirely dependent on Lua, should probably consider offering at least token support (https://www.lua.org/thanks.html https://www.lua.org/thanks.html).
- imachine1980_ 2y ago
  Why does the market cap allow you to decide about other people's projects? Lua is used in many places, and its users aren't all employees of Roblox. Lua is popular because it works in a way that sometimes breaks backward compatibility, making the language as easy and lean as it is. If there's a disagreement on how it should be used, just fork it like Roblox did.
TheRealPomax 2y ago
Of course it was: there is nothing preventing a company from contacting the dev team and going "we've one quite a bit of work, are you interested in getting any of that upstreamed". Getting changes upstreamed is in no way the exclusive domain of fully open source projects, it just requires reaching out. Just because there's a closed development model doesn't automatically imply the devs team lives and breathes "not-invented-here"-ism and are no interested in discussing improvements that make a difference to actual people using Lua in (extremely) large real world products.
- samatman 2y ago
  It was not a general statement, but rather, a specific one. > Lua is not "open developed". The development is done exclusively by the Lua team, at PUC-Rio. So, we do not need a SVN repository. Currently, we keep Lua with the good old RCS. - Roberto Ierusalimschy http://lua-users.org/lists/lua-l/2007-09/msg00476.html http://lua-users.org/lists/lua-l/2007-09/msg00476.html
  - TheRealPomax 2y ago
    Yes, I know, that was my point too: it's closed development and so you can talk to the dev team to get changes worked into Lua itself. You don't get to just open a PR and start thigns that way, you have to talk to people. And going "well we didn't contact them" when you're the size of Roblox would be incredible.
    - drekipus 2y ago
      > The development is done exclusively by the Lua team, at PUC-Rio. So, we do not need a SVN repository. If I had this as my message, and someone asked to ship changes, I would be more than mad. just take the L dude.
      - TheRealPomax 2y ago
        What a ridiculous thing to say. If you ran, or were part of, an academically run project, "you'd get mad" if a huge industry player went "hey we did some stuff with your project, some of it might be interesting to you, want to chat about potential upstreaming?" really, dude?
        drekipus 2y ago
        Yes, because that is more burden to ensure that it still fits my purpose, the intended goals, and that whoever it is, is doing it properly. Which would be the whole reason I would put such a statement there, in the first place. What are you even trying to argue with now? That I'm not allowed to get angry in the hypothetical that I made up? Do you see why it's fruitless to continue arguing? Or are you going to pick out some prior wording and analyse it further, because you just can't comprehend that corporations don't have best interests at heart, and some people prefer to just put things up and not deal with other people's improvements

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]