On Saturday, 31 January 2015 at 18:45:13 UTC, Israel wrote:
On Saturday, 31 January 2015 at 18:11:48 UTC, Laeeth Isharc
wrote:
This has the advantage over existing situation where you have
the official library where things need to go through exacting
and time consuming process and then dub. Within dub every
project is at the same level and it is not obvious which
projects are the ones to use, and there is not necessarily
coherence in the different ways things are done, and the only
one motivated to work on supplementary features like
documentation is the project author. So you have very useful,
well written libraries that have no docs.
What i hate about dub is that no every library is ready to use.
Some require additional steps/resources in order to get them to
work. Dub does not have any indication of that because the
library authors don't usually include that information.
What is good about this "extra community driven standard
library" is that everything will be included in one place and
will be at the ready when it is needed.
Thanks. I wanted to mention the DUB packages but the post would
be too long.
DUB can be seen as a repository of special purpose packages
without the burden of standardization process and out of the box
properties. In general, this proposal assumes DUB repository will
serve the same role as it does now.
Piotrek
