Re: Lua for sysinst, next steps?

Izumi Tsutsui <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.os.netbsd.devel.installation,gmane.os.netbsd.devel.userlevel
Message-ID <[email protected]>
martin@ wrote:

> On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 11:06:25AM +0100, Marc Balmer wrote:
> > So what should be the next steps?  There are probably (hopefully...)
> > some folks around that want to step in and help with coding, so that
> > would mean to commit it, but then are of course as always those that say
> > "please don't commit until it is finished and polished" ;)  So I am
> > stalled now.
> 
> I don't see why this shouldn't be commited - it basically is a complete
> first phase (not sure what other polishing would be needed), and you can
> deal with further phases on a branch.

If we can disable sysinst Lua support by USE_LUA=no, I think it's okay
to commit to head.  I could also help to fix possible Tier-II breakage.
(unless buildability persons complain daily failure)

But if we can provide test install images/isos with Lua enabled sysinst
(by "build.sh release install-image iso-image" or so) before commit
it will also help reviewers.

---
Izumi Tsutsui
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.