DerelictBgfx not shipping core libs.

[olivier henley via Digitalmars-d]

Hi,

May I ask what is the rational to not ship the core libs with the 
bgfx D wrapper? From my point of view it defies the main goal of 
using a D wrapper.

1. How can we promote the wrapper package if it implies to build 
not one, as of ... only bgfx, but two packages, bgfx and 
DerelictBgfx? Better stick to c/c++ then, and enjoy the path of 
least resistance. Don't you think?

2. Does the maintainer guaranty his wrapper will stay in sync 
with further changes of bgfx?

3. Is there anything in the license refraining from shipping 
precompiled libs of the original package? (e.g. To my knowledge 
tkd publishes similar binaries (tcl and tk) without further legal 
complications.)

4. Am I missing something except the fact that a neophyte to the 
DerelictBgfx package is left with an incomplete build, of both 
the lib and the examples, an anemic README.md and a dead forum 
(http://dblog.aldacron.net/forum/index.php?topic=841.0)?

Thank you,

olivier