DerelictBgfx not shipping core libs.

[Mike Parker via Digitalmars-d]

On Friday, 7 November 2014 at 18:46:50 UTC, olivier henley wrote:

>
> Nevertheless I feel we should be told upfront about the 
> implications of using your package in the context that you 
> can't and won't deliver dependencies like others do. By upfront 
> I mean in an explicit way, limit as a warning.
>

Back in the Derelict 2 days I had a good bit of documentation 
written up [1]. Despite that, I still had people coming to the 
forums looking for help about things that were covered clearly in 
the docs. Others were getting help elsewhere. Few people read 
documentation in practice (which is the reason I put it off to 
the last when working on Derelict 3 and, now, DerelictOrg). 
Still, I never had anyone raise an issue about not distributing 
the binaries. As such, it's never occurred to me that it could be 
an issue.

I don't think any "warnings" about my not distributing binaries 
are necessary. You make it sound as if I'm doing something 
extremely out of the ordinary. If I were distributing a game 
framework or some such, you might have a  point. But for a 
collection of bindings, I just don't agree.

At any rate, I'm soon to add a section to the docs at [2] about 
using Derelict at runtime. I'll include a line explaining that 
the shared library binaries for the C libraries need to be 
obtained separately. The package-specific documentation will 
include links to the project pages, as the READMEs already and 
will continue to do. I'll also add a line to the READMEs, 
instructing the user to obtain the shared libraries separately. 
That should be sufficient.

[1] 
http://svn.dsource.org/projects/derelict/branches/Derelict2/doc/index.html
[2] http://derelictorg.github.io/using.html