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

[Dicebot]

On Friday, 27 September 2013 at 13:29:26 UTC, Wyatt wrote:
> Unless we're talking about different things, that's denoted in 
> the META.json (I don't recall if the distinction existed in the 
> META.yaml era) with e.g.
>     "release_status" : "stable",
> or
>     "release_status" : "testing",

No, I mean that it does not make any difference between "programs 
written in perl to be widely used" and "libraries / tools for 
development in perl". For interpreted languages this distinction 
hardly makes sense, but for natively compiled ones it is pretty 
important.

And that was kind of the core point of the argument - can 
language-specific package manager be allowed to manage the 
former? I stand by the point that is a bad practice to provide 
any functionality that allows it, Jacob has opposite point of 
view :)