Re: Why do we need lua in-tree again? Yet another call for actual evidence, please. (was Re: Moving Lua source codes)

[Marc Balmer <marc%msys.ch@localhost>]

Am 19.10.13 09:03, schrieb Alan Barrett:
> On Sat, 19 Oct 2013, Marc Balmer wrote:
>> The inclusion and use of Lua in base, for use in userland and the
>> kernel, [...] has, last but not least, core's blessing.
> 
> Would you please either present some evidence for that claim, or stop
> making the claim.

I am not making a claim.  And what is this, a trial, that you ask me to
present evidence?  You were not a core team member at the time, so I
really can't blame you that you don't remember it.  But I blame you for
making this up as if it was "sweeping kernel change" or so.  It's a tiny
device driver that uses source code that is already in the tree since
about three years.  I will eventually dig out the email exchange, but
that will have to wait, I am at a trade show right now.

> 
> To the best of my knowledge, userland Lua was approved by core in 2010,
> but kernel Lua has never been approved by core.
> 
>> Can we now please stop this useless discussion?
> 
> People will continue to ask questions until they receive some
> satisfactory answers.

Me and others are giving answers.  It just seem so that it is not the
answers some people want to hear.  What Lua is good for as been
discussed many times, there are presentation slides around etc.