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

[Dicebot]

On Wednesday, 25 September 2013 at 15:51:47 UTC, Bruno Medeiros 
wrote:
> Whoa, no. Application/executable install management as a goal 
> would be a ridiculously bad idea.
> Because that would sit at the wrong abstraction level. The OS 
> package manager should not be tied to a particular language to 
> compile packages from. Does it makes any sense to have to use 
> D's package manager if my cmd-line util is written in D, but if 
> I have a C++ or Go derived executable, I would have to use a 
> different package manager for each? And what if I want my tool 
> to depend (at runtime) on an executable generated from another 
> language? Devise a mechanism for cross-package-manager 
> interoperaction?...
> Ridiculous. An application/executable manager should be 
> language agnostic (and not even require compilation).
>
> What dub should be first and foremost is a structured build 
> tool (and build specification) for D projects.

There is a quite extensive discussion on topic here: 
http://forum.rejectedsoftware.com/groups/rejectedsoftware.dub/thread/274/ 
(~ second half), you may want to help me push that idea :P