etc vs. package mangers

[SomeDude]

On Monday, 7 October 2013 at 07:12:13 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> On Monday, October 07, 2013 08:36:16 Jacob Carlborg wrote:
>> On 2013-10-06 22:40, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> > I think /etc/ should be a stepping stone to std, just like 
>> > in C++ boost
>> > is for std (and boost's sandbox is for boost).
>> 
>> Currently "etc" seems like where C bindings are placed.
>
> That's what I thought that it was for. I don't remember etc 
> ever really being
> discussed before, and all it has are C bindings, so the idea 
> that it would
> hold anything other than C bindings is news to me, though I 
> think that we
> should probably shy away from putting C bindings in Phobos in 
> general.
>
> - Jonathan M Davi

The problem is, if these C bindings are removed, the immediate 
reflex will be to think that Phobos doesn't have the features 
that were fulfilled by these bindings. So the impulse will be to 
reinvent the wheel, when these bindings are perfectly okay and do 
the job well. C bindings is a way to save us time and build upon 
proven quality libraries. I don't see any problem with C bindings 
being in the standard library, as long as they are really useful 
and high quality. The "not invented here" itch is a bad one. The 
workforce of the community should be directed at real problems 
and filling real gaps, rather than being wasted at reinventing 
the wheel merely for aethetic/ideological reasons.

I don't see any need to remove etc.