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.

Reply via email to