Including Dub with D

[Dicebot via Digitalmars-d]

On Friday, 23 May 2014 at 14:43:20 UTC, Kiith-Sa wrote:
> On Friday, 23 May 2014 at 06:24:28 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
>> On 22/05/14 21:11, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>>
>>> Is there anything blocking actual adoption of SDL? I'm not 
>>> holding
>>> anything up am I? Sonke: If there's anything you need 
>>> done/dealt-with
>>> regarding SDLang-D, let me know.
>>
>> Do we want/need the SDL parser/writer to be included into 
>> Phobos first?
>
> This is my concern. Waiting for another module to get into 
> phobos before DUB gets included is too much. Couldn't SDL be 
> added later as an option? (For small files like this I find 
> this to be a bikeshed issue. DUB files are very readable as is 
> and I don't like the idea of waiting 6 more months (as is 
> typical in D))

I don't see it as a problem. dub and dub-registry will stay 
separate repositories and won't be included in phobos or tools 
repo so we can just let it go. I know that in general it is good 
policy to keep official stuff phobos-only but here it is simply 
unfeasible.

dub-registry itself depends on vibe.d anyway and it is not like 
we are going to include _that_ into phobos :)