On 06/27/2013 06:14 PM, Graydon Hoare wrote:
This does not mean that you must fetch a package named "github.com/graydon/foo" from github.com, but it means that if you don't have any other source for that package, you can guess at where to get it. And it has a unique name (assuming you decide to use that fact).
I have a rust project hosted on github, but the package name is certainly not github.com/<my_username>/<repository_name> in my mind. What if it was hosted on bitbucket? What if I delete the repository? I find it puzzling to have to place my local repository inside a directory named github.com/<my_username>/<repository_name> for me to be able to build my local copy using rustpkg.
It's the last bit that bothers me the most: I can't build my local project unless I introduce a completely irrelevant aspect (my git host and username) into my metadata (the directory structure).
This was chosen very carefully, very intentionally, and (for the time being) we're not revisiting this choice. We experimented before with having multiple points of name-indirection or metadata and it appears to have just annoyed and confused everyone.
Most package system I've reviewed prior to writing that email used a metadata file in its package system. It really is not clear why Rust must be nearly unique in this point. In the 3 sources of documentation you've linked to there really wasn't a motivation behind why the widespread metadata file approach was wrong.
I understand that this is too late to change this, but at the same time I find integrating my (sole for now) Rust project into rustpkg to be really disruptive, relative to simply including a metadata file like I've done for my projects in other languages.
-SL _______________________________________________ Rust-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
