On Friday, 27 September 2013 at 06:49:39 UTC, Jacob Carlborg
wrote:
On 2013-09-26 13:39, Dicebot wrote:
No, you just let maintainers interested in target systems to
take care
of it. And package for 2-3 you care about _personally_. It is
an
obsolete idea that developer of a library/program should do any
packaging at all. If your program is any good, there will
always be
volunteers to adapt it nicely for their beloved systems.
How about doing a compromise. We add a new command to "dub"
which will execute an installed package. Something like this:
$ dub install foo
$ dub exec foo --help
This will by default look in the package.json file, in the
current working directory, if it exists, for the correct
version of the package to run.
Ok, this is pretty hygienic (though as I have said it makes more
sense to call it `dub cache` instead of `dub install`). Though
what does it give you over just providing same environment via
build dependencies? (I know, dub does not seem to build binaries
from dependencies right now but I got an impression this is going
to be fixed)
