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

[Dmitry Olshansky]

15-Feb-2013 00:18, Jacob Carlborg пишет:
> On 2013-02-14 21:14, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
>
>> I believe that the idea is that any amount of helpers is fine as long as
>> they are private and don't obfuscate code. Phobos contains a lot tiny
>> helpers that _might_ be useful but not exposed because of dubious
>> general utility and potentially confusing names.
>>
>> As far pushing good primitives into Phobos, it'd better be done one step
>> at time and decoupled of the actual inclusion of Orbit (if we can agree
>> on it being included) into say tools repo and being bundled with DMD.
>

> I agree that might be the best idea. But that is mostly for the "any"
> function and similar smaller utility functions. The bigger problems are
> like the serialization modules. Sure they could be put directly in Orbit
> as well. But I still got dependencies on Tango for stuff like XML, Zip,
> net and argument parsing.

Then there are these ways forward IMHO:
a) Admit that tango for D2 exists (easy) and bundle it with DMD (the 
hard/not likely/inconvenient part)
b) Agree that we need to port it and issue a call to port/re-write 
required facilities for Orbit on top of phobos/curl. This means pulls 
against Orbit repo not phobos BTW.
c) Forget about Orbit and try something else, like Dub?

About serialization (that seems the biggest roadblock) - what exactly 
does Orbit need it for? Maybe it can be decoupled and/or easily 
re-written by hand until Orange or similar stuff gets into Phobos.

Regardless I think reducing dependencies is the important for inclusion 
of any new component into the "D core".

-- 
Dmitry Olshansky