Am 10.09.2013 23:04, schrieb Nick Sabalausky:
On Tue, 10 Sep 2013 23:01:12 +0200
"Brad Anderson" <[email protected]> wrote:
I vote yes but only if Sönke feels it is ready. I suspect he has
a few things he'll probably want done before this happens (the
potential switch from JSON to SDL comes to mind).
I assume that would be a backwards-compatible change. Make SDL the
preferred, but keep JSON in service.
Exactly. Given enough interest, we could also make a more formal review
process for a future SDL based format to ensure a maximum chance of a
solid, forward compatible format.
Of my former list mentioned in the VisualD thread [1], only package
signing is really still missing, but that's probably not mission
critical for now. The command line build process also needs to be
improved one way or another at some point (mostly caching pre-compiled
dependencies), but that also isn't really a strong argument anymore.
All in all I'd say that the things that are in the package format [2] by
now form a pretty solid basis to move forward without worrying too much
about future breakage.
[1]: http://forum.rejectedsoftware.com/groups/rejectedsoftware.vibed/post/79
[2]: http://code.dlang.org/package-format
