dub: should we make it the de jure package manager for D?

[John Colvin]

On Wednesday, 11 September 2013 at 13:39:02 UTC, Nick Sabalausky 
wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Sep 2013 21:10:46 +0800
> Lionello Lunesu <lionello at lunesu.remove.com> wrote:
>
>> On 9/11/13 5:01, Brad Anderson wrote:
>> > I vote yes but only if Sönke feels it is ready. I suspect he 
>> > has a
>> > few things he'll probably want done before this happens (the
>> > potential switch from JSON to SDL comes to mind).
>> 
>> SD-what?! Why would alienate people even more than we already 
>> do?
>> 
>> L.
>
>
> ----------------------------
> {
> 	"name": "myproject",
> 	"description": "A little web service of mine.",
> 	"authors": ["Peter Parker", "Joe Contrib"],
>
> 	"dependencies": {
> 		"vibe-d": ">=0.7.11",
> 		"mylib:component1": "~master",
> 		"mylib:component2": "~master"
> 	},
>
> 	"subPackages": [
> 		{
> 			"name": "component1",
> 			"targetType": "library",
> 			"sourcePaths": ["source/component1"]
> 		},
> 		{
> 			"name": "component2",
> 			"targetType": "library",
> 			"sourcePaths": ["source/component2"]
> 		}
> 	]
> }
> ----------------------------
>
> vs:
>
> ----------------------------
> name "myproject",
> description "A little web service of mine."
> authors "Peter Parker" "Joe Contrib"
>
> dependencies {
> 	vibe-d ">=0.7.11"
> 	mylib:component1 "~master"
> 	mylib:component2 "~master"
> }
>
> subPackage {
> 	name "component1"
> 	targetType "library"
> 	sourcePaths "source/component1"
> }
>
> subPackage {
> 	name "component2"
> 	targetType "library"
> 	sourcePaths "source/component2"
> }
> ----------------------------
>
> That's why.
>
> Besides, the JSON form wouldn't be going away anyway, it'd 
> still be
> kept.

Why not YAML? It's cleaner than JSON and is very widely known.