On 02/23/2016 02:43 AM, James McCoy wrote: >> The moment they start embedding LuaJIT into neovim, the package needs >> to be patched or it will be removed out of Debian. > > That's a bit of an overreaction. What I meant was what's typically > meant when talking of embedding a language[0][1][2] (especially with > Lua), using the language's functionality from the application.
Well, then we were thinking about different things. Good to know that they are not talking about embedding the actual library. >> I still don't see what warrants the requirement of LuaJIT in a text >> editor which could not replaced by the regular Lua interpretor. > > As I mentioned earlier, LuaC doesn't provide FFI which is something they > apparently want to use. Also, one of the major purposes they're looking > at for using Lua(JIT) is translating VimL to Lua and then executing > that. The thought is that using Lua itself instead of LuaJIT would make > that too slow. Some more information on what has been under discussion > can be seen in <https://github.com/neovim/neovim/issues/801>. Well, they could just always allow Lua as a fallback on architectures were LuaJIT is not available. Haskell's hslua does the same, why wouldn't NeoVIM be able to do that? > Regardless, I don't see why you're having such a strong reaction to > this. It's their design choice and just because it limits what > architectures they'll be able to run on it isn't reason enough to > consider this a bug. There are plenty of applications in Debian which > don't run on all the supported architectures/kernels. Yes, but that does not mean we should accept that in Debian. Debian specifically aims to provide a universal distribution which runs on a large number of different targets and everyone should therefore help to keep their own packages available on all targets. Especially when it comes to such mundane things like a text editor. > Bram took extreme efforts to keep compatibility with arcane and mostly > unused computers/OSes and that's something the Neovim folks have decided > not to continue, for better or worse. So, you would say that ARM64, PPC64EL (POWER8), S390X, MIPS64EL and SPARC64 [1] are all "arcane" and "mostly unused" architectures? I find that a bit ignorant, to be honest. 4 of the 5 architectures I mentioned are currently release architectures and SPARC64 is currently being worked on to become a release architecture. There is a world beyond x86, you know :). Adrian > [1] https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=luajit&suite=unstable -- .''`. John Paul Adrian Glaubitz : :' : Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org `. `' Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de `- GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546 0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913
