On Monday, 12 August 2013 at 15:39:59 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
On Monday, 12 August 2013 at 14:34:04 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
That's true. But, correct me if I'm wrong, rpms and the like
are bundled independently of the original source repository.
So a project relying solely on dub doesn't stop a package
maintainer from keeping a separate build script to bundle with
the rpm.
Yeah, but imagine creating hard dependency on certain library
version in sources (with no real need, something like too
specific SONAME) - it requires package maintainer not only to
keep bundling script, but also to patch project sources before
building. Something maintainers are usually not happy to do :)
It is not that common but forgetting that user environment will
be different from yours is kind of easier with all the
convenience `dub` brings you.
In general I think keeping packager and developer duties
separate is a good/right thing, however, it is much easier when
developers think about binary dependencies separately from
source ones.
My view may indeed be heavily tinted by Windows, where this sort
of thing just isn't an issue to care about. I suppose I'll have
to adjust that a bit.
