The DUB package manager

[Jacob Carlborg]

On 2013-02-16 20:37, H. S. Teoh wrote:

> I think Sönke's idea is actually very good. I know we all have our own
> preferences for build systems (I know I do -- for example, I abhor
> anything to do with makefiles), but having a standardized way to specify
> a build has many advantages. Imagine the user-unfriendliness of
> downloading a bunch of packages from the D package manager, only to
> discover that one requires make, another requires cmake, another
> requires SCons, another requires Ant, pretty soon, what should be just a
> simple automatic download turns into a nightmare of installing 20
> different build systems just so you can use a bunch of packages from the
> standard D package manager.
>
> Having a standardized way of generating build scripts is good, because
> then the D package manager can target the *end user*'s preferred build
> system, rather than whatever build system the package writers chose. The
> package writers can just specify how to build the stuff, then let the D
> packager generate makefiles for one user, Ant files for another user,
> etc.. This makes it much more friendly to use, and therefore, more
> likely people will actually use it.

The build system doesn't need to embedded in the package manager just to 
have a standardize build system. See this:

http://forum.dlang.org/thread/kfoei9$bmd$1@digitalmars.com?page=4#post-kfqium:24unf:241:40digitalmars.com

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg