Expanding Phobos from a flat hierachy

[Jonathan M Davis]

On Thursday, February 07, 2013 13:17:20 Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> On 2013-02-06 18:22, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> > I understand. The way I see this is as an motivation and opportunity to
> > add the necessary functionality to Phobos. I may be uninformed, but the
> > way I see it basic package management doesn't have to be very demanding
> > on library functionality.
> 
> No it doesn't need to have a demanding library functionality. But I have
> creating these libraries because they contain common code I use in
> several of my tools and libraries. I think duplicating that code just to
> avoid having any library dependencies would be quite foolish.
> 
> The reason why I use Tango is that it contains functionality that is
> either missing or not good enough in Phobos. Also, remember that I
> started this project several years ago.

All of which is fine as long as it's a 3rd party project. I think that Andrei's 
point is that if you have any interest in it being D's official package manager, 
it needs to be changed to use Phobos only, even if that requires adding or 
improving functionality in Phobos. An official package manager can't rely on 3rd 
party libraries or tools.

So, either Orbit needs to be updated to not depend on anything beyond D's 
standard library, or it should stop being presented as a possible official 
package manager. That's not saying anything bad about the project or the work 
that you've done. It's just saying that it does not currently fit the 
requirements for an official project.

- Jonathan M Davis