Before we implement SDL package format for DUB

[Dicebot via Digitalmars-d]

On Friday, 29 August 2014 at 02:10:47 UTC, Jeremy Powers via 
Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 12:30 PM, Nick Sabalausky via 
> Digitalmars-d <
> digitalmars-d at puremagic.com> wrote:
>
>> Therefore, I think the main critera we should be looking at 
>> here, for any
>> of the possibilities, isn't "Does this language have flaws?" 
>> but rather "Is
>> this language *good enough* to be supported by DUB as a JSON 
>> alternative?"
>>
>
>
> The 'alternative' bit is the kicker.  Personally, I don't 
> believe DUB can
> succeed at having multiple supported config languages - one or 
> the other
> will win out over time, and users will diverge.  So no language 
> would meet
> that bar (in my opinion).

I can totally see JSON format being used mostly by the tools and 
new one written by actual developers - everyone gets its niche.