Deimos need some works

[bioinfornatics]

On Wednesday, 17 July 2013 at 21:01:16 UTC, Jonathan M Davis 
wrote:
> On Wednesday, July 17, 2013 22:40:58 bioinfornatics wrote:
>> to package deimos project that is not really easy
>> each module has his repo
>> each module should to be builded not in same way
>
> While I don't necessarily disagree that how deimos is done 
> needs some work, I
> don't see why you would ever need to package deimos. It 
> contains disparate
> libraries that aren't necessarily intended to be used together 
> at all (and
> potentially can't be - e.g. if one were Linux-specific and 
> another were
> Windows-specific). Having the deimos project is useful, because 
> it gives us one
> place to look for D bindings for C libraries, but the libraries 
> in there are
> otherwise completely unrelated to each other and thus packaging 
> them together
> really doesn't make sense IMHO.
>
> Several of them are set up to use dub though, which makes 
> grabbing them much
> easier. I think that my biggest gripe with how Deimos is set up 
> is that the
> folks who manage the projects in there aren't in control of 
> them. So, they
> can't merge anything themselves or do other git commands such 
> as tagging or
> branching. Some of the Phobos devs do have merge rights, but 
> that doesn't make
> it so that they can do other stuff like tagging or branching. 
> So, the result is
> that only a few people (like Walter and probably Andrei) can do 
> all of the
> various stuff to those repos that a repo maintainer might want 
> to do (like
> branching), and yet the only reason that they're grouped 
> together in the first
> place is searchability. So, we've gained the searchability at 
> the cost of
> flexibility. But I don't know how to fix that aside maybe from 
> Walter giving
> full permissions/access to a deimos repo to its primary 
> maintainer (without
> giving them permissions to other deimos repos), but I don't 
> know what github
> will or won't allow you to do in that regard.
>
> - Jonathan M Davis

I agree with your point of view.

I package for a linux distro so maintain one package which sync 
each module to current stable is more easy to maintain versus 
maintain x module .
I do not know dub i will take a look if is an irtaller system for 
user or it could to be used to do a package