Re: Lua in NetBSD

[Antti Kantee <pooka%cs.hut.fi@localhost>]

On Sat Oct 24 2009 at 15:16:00 -0400, Thor Lancelot Simon wrote:
> Like most development organizations, Coyote Point does the best design
> we can, evaluates the design carefully, decides whether to proceed on
> that basis, and then spends the time and effort to do the best
> implementation we can.
> 
> Generally our results don't suck, but on the rare occasions when they
> do, we reevaluate at that time.  In the usual case, however, our
> go/no-go decision is made after the design, not the implementation,
> phase, because implementation costs a lot of time and money and we don't
> particularly care to waste either.
> 
> I suspect that, similarly, that is the development process most of the
> other people advocating Lua in NetBSD are used to and prefer.
> 
> It seems like you would prefer that NetBSD follow some other process.
> I think you may be almost alone in that preference, but I can accept
> that that is your preference.  Please do me the courtesy of actually
> accepting that my preference is mine -- and don't make up silly parodies
> of it.
> 
> If you'd care to actually engage with what I said, rather than put words
> in my mouth, let me know, and let's take it offline.

For the sake of argument (and that's what this is), let's assume decision
based on careful design.

Where's your careful design?  "some cool things: <list>" is not a
careful design.  Having a proprietary careful plan we can't see places a
lot of trust in you (as well-placed as it might be).  A research project
doing something similar is very interesting and I look forward to their
results with great anticipation.  But what if their conclusion in a year
is "it was a horrible idea and Y works much better"?

I don't even know why we are having this discussion.  If Lua-proponents
would have done their homework properly and presented a coherent proposal
a month later based on facts instead of could-be and can't-show, nobody
would have to argue.

And for the record, I fully acknowledge your right for your preference.
That was not under debate.  The debate was whether Lua integration
should be given a holy mandate.  If this were in a corporate context,
I might even agree with you.  NetBSD is a different playground, so
I don't.  However alone I might be with that does not change anything
and I fail to see why you are even pointing it out instead of sticking
to relevant issues.