RE: [ANN] Kepler 1.0 Released (for Lua 5.0)

["Andre Carregal" <carregal@...>]

> Zed A. Shaw wrote:
> You know, I've been wanting to use Kepler for a long time,
> but it simply doesn't pass the "5-minute/3-command" test.  I
> struggled through getting it working once before but can't
> even remember how I did that, let alone figure out how it all
> works now.

I understand your pain and really appreciate the feedback.

That's precisely why we have done a major overhaul of the Unix installation
process and Kepler is now a typical "3-command" system (by the way, some
report the test experience as a "3-minute" one).

Have you checked the 1.0 version? Please don't take the bad experience with
the old Beta as your last image of Kepler.

> What you guys seriously need is something that's more than a
> list of the components Kepler has.  That's fine, now i can
> read what each thing does, but the point of Kepler is that
> you've pulled these together to create something better.

Well, if you consider that it now offers an integrated installer for Windows
users and the aforementioned simpler Unix setup, this is arguably something
better than a bunch of separated modules, no?

While assembling modules and environments may seem trivial for some of the
readers here, this is not so true for the vast majority of users who try
Kepler not having had any contact with Lua before.

> I really seriously think you need to have:
>
> * Getting Started -- From nothing to "hello world".
> * Your First Application -- Building something non-trivial with Kepler.
> * Deployment Guide -- One for win32 and Unix.

No questions about that. Documentation is our biggest concern now. This
release has advanced things a bit, but not much indeed.

> If there was just these three documents I could then get on
> my way to exploring all the remaining components. The only
> remaining thing is generating some kind of automated source
> documentation similar to Doxygen.

Not sure where this fits in the equation, but there will be LuaDoc to the
rescue someday in the near future.

> And hell, if I could figure Kepler out again I'd write the
> above documents.  But I'm so lost after "./configure; make"
> that I can't go anywhere.

Helping writing and revising documentation is certainly a really welcome
thing. If someone wants to join the adventure we have a separate list with
more than 100 subscribers. Not much compared to other platforms around, but
a good start for something without docs...

> Anyway, advice from your friendly Ruby insider.

As I said, thanks for the advice, but please keep in mind that even Ruby
took some time to get to 1.0 too. And no, I'm not comparing Ruby with Kepler
here, just the number of years involved... :o)
http://migo.sixbit.org/papers/Introduction_to_Ruby/slide-62.html

Andre