DUB - call to arms

[Atila Neves]

On Sunday, 14 April 2019 at 11:38:23 UTC, Guillaume Piolat wrote:
> On Sunday, 14 April 2019 at 11:21:09 UTC, Andre Pany wrote:
>>
>> Dub has a working eco system and a lot of developers put 
>> effort into it. It will take years to have another solution 
>> with the same functionality like Dub and please do not forget 
>> we still have to maintain Dub until the new solution can 
>> replace Dub.
>> Could you please write the details why a correction of Dub 
>> isn't possible and a complete rewrite is the only solution?
>>
>
> Don't mistake me, DUB is a good software that is very useful 
> and that's a feat for a build system - something very easy to 
> hate.
>
> A lot of things are possible incrementally, but I believe in 
> the DUB design some things will not be possible.
>
> - dub.selections.json is supposed to encode dependency 
> resolution, but fundamentally it does that for a particular 
> optional dependencies selections set and configuration.
>
> - I personally think it has way to many features, and in such 
> situations it's way harder to find those to remove because 
> agreement is difficult
>
> - work is piling on for DUB because it is designed in a way 
> that say yes to everything, features have piled on with no 
> regards for who would maintain them
>
> Withing DUB there is a much simpler subset to be discovered I 
> believe. For the record I was an early contributor, I did what 
> I could.

+1 to all your points, including your previous post on this 
thread.

FWIW, I'm currently writing code to use dub as a library and 
bypass most of it.

Rewriting from scratch isn't feasible - it has to be bug 
compatible. But reusing the parts that get information from 
packages and ignoring everything else...