Why isn't DSSS ('s net portion) more widely used?

[Bill Baxter]

Gregor Richards wrote:
> Robert Fraser wrote:
>> DSSS seems like a great tool, but only a very small subset of 
>> available D libraries are installable via it. I can see it turning 
>> into something like CPAN, where you can easily get a module and its 
>> required dependencies, without really having to worry about version 
>> compatibility, etc, etc. ANy ideas on why it's not more widely used?
> 
> How many times have I asked myself this question X-D
> 
> The unfortunate truth is that most of the tools installable via DSSS 
> aren't even DSSS-maintained. I made the dsss.conf files for them and 
> maintain said dsss.conf files as patches.
> 
> Basically, it's a chicken-and-egg problem. Because D grew up to where it 
> is with no standard system for installation of libraries, trying to 
> force people to use one now is a bit difficult. I guess all I can say 
> is: If you have some specific library you'd like added to `dsss net`, 
> write the dsss.conf file yourself, and I can add it as a patch. It's a 
> gross, temporary solution, but at least it would allow dependent 
> libraries to be fully DSSS'd.
> 
> If somebody wants to start a DSSS advocacy group ... ^^
> 
>  - Gregor Richards

I think it just takes time.  I've only started tinkering around with 
DSSS recently and figuring out how to write DSSS.conf files.  (The new 
developer-oriented docs are very helpful by the way).   People who 
started developing their projects a long while ago already have 
solutions worked out for compiling their code, and for the most part, 
nobody is interested in rewriting a build system that works unless they 
really really have to.

But I think it's likely newer projects (and newer D developers) will 
adopt dsss from the start.  ... As long as someone remembers to ask 
every month or so why dsss/rebuild aren't more popular than they are.  :-)

--bb