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

[Jacob Carlborg]

On 2013-09-27 10:05, Dicebot wrote:

> It won't install it out of clone dir either in that mode. Why would it?
> Building is enough.

I'm not going to argue the semantics of "install". But yes, building is 
enough for that command.

> Currently you can define dependencies in your package.json to other dub
> packages. Those will be in your -I flags when building. I expect this to
> be also extended to -L and PATH, so that you can call any binaries from
> dependency packages as if they were installed (during build/test of your
> package). For this to work no real installation is needed, just building
> packages straight in the clone dir and keeping it.

If that's supported then "dub exec" won't give any advantage. But since 
that's currently isn't supported I suggested the "dub exec" command.

Unless "dub exec" can be used without a package.json file. That would 
work with packages you previously run "dub install" for.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg