Is it possible for the deimos repositories to be added to the dub registry please?

[David Nadlinger]

On Monday, 6 January 2014 at 16:49:44 UTC, ilya-stromberg wrote:
> Unfortunately, Deimos does not good enough.
> I used `libfcgi` ~2 years ago, and it was completely broken 
> (segmentation fault after 1-st GC memory free).
> So, I agree with Jacob: we should close down Deimos. As 
> alternative, we should use the same review process as for 
> Phobos.

So there is a single library that is not "good enough". Where is 
your bug report? Your pull request?

I just had a look at the libfcgi repository, and it seems like 
Jonathan recommends building the binding with "ldc2 -shared" in 
the readme. There are two things wrong with this:
   1) -shared is not yet supported in LDC for D2 (it will lead to 
GC-related crashes), and Jonathan knows this.
   2) Deimos headers should *never* require actually building 
something, they should be "header-only", in C terms.
So, yes, there are apparently problems with getting the Deimos 
idea across (and Walter's code review practices), but I don't see 
how this justifies ditching the whole idea.

The idea behind Deimos is that there should be a single of plain, 
"no-frills" C bindings, because it makes exactly zero sense to 
duplicate work here. Other people can build on these for 
higher-level libraries. Whether these are managed in one central 
place or in separate repositories doesn't matter in the end; the 
thing that counts is that we have a common understanding of how 
bindings that are "officially" accepted are supposed look like. 
If every single C binding on code.dlang.org follows a different 
naming scheme, loading convention, …, just using a C library will 
become a lot less of a plug-and-play experience than it could be.

Yes, there are currently issues with the way Deimos is handled, 
starting with the fact that a ridiculously small number of people 
actually has push access to them (e.g. I have access to all the 
D-P-L ones, but not to Deimos). In fact, I think it might even 
make sense idea to give the original creator of a binding write 
access to the repository after the initial review is complete, 
which ensures that the author is familiar with the Deimos 
conventions. There isn't really a lot to get wrong with C 
bindings that would necessitate much review afterwards.

Also, we need to improve the documentation about the Deimos 
standards and process. But still, I don't think we should 
outright ditch the idea at this point; the situation certainly 
won't get better without Deimos being in the picture.

David