What's missing from Phobos for Orbit (package manager)

[Peter Sommerfeld]

Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> The question then is: Which of the needed functionality can be moved to  
> Phobos and which can not be?
>  I would like to avoid rewriting large parts of the code that is already  
> working perfectly fine.
>  I also don't think it's good to include large part of library code in  
> Orbit, i.e. a serialization library.

That seems to be a question of priority: If you insist to get the
dependencies into phobos first it will take some time until that
happens, may be never or parts of it only.

A solution for now seems to be to pack the dependencies into Orbit
and later push parts of it into phobos. That will establish an API
which defines the d-package manager, provided it is accepted by
Walter and Andre. Your decision...

Peter