I just created a dub package. Frankly, the whole thign is backward.

[rikki cattermole]

On 27/04/2022 6:14 AM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
>> However in 10 years I haven't needed it, I only just recently got
>> around to improving shared library support so it actually worked as I
>> needed that ;)
> 
> I'd be happy to contribute toward making dub more general, like I
> outlined above.  But my current perception is that the dub maintainers
> aren't interested in moving in this direction. I'd be happy to be proven
> wrong, though!

Yeah, there is a strong desire in the community to make dub support 
other build systems. It has been known for many years that this will 
need to happen at some point.

It is its greatest weakness due to it not supporting other languages. 
Which happens to be why it also works very well for D only projects *sigh*.

Note: there really isn't any maintainers, that is the problem. Dub needs 
someone to step up to the plate to manage it.

If we had someone who was able to review code and merge stuff for dub 
without waiting months (total exaggeration) a lot of these issues might 
go away (man power wise).

Of course this will be needed once ImportC starts to be mature enough to 
use (i.e. integrated preprocessor).

> [...]
>>>> Upgrade only might be a good addition however.
>>>
>>> Doesn't dub already do this? Or am I not understanding this right?
>>
>> I don't know. I don't use this feature.
>>
>> https://github.com/dlang/dub/issues/2244
> 
> I think I'm missing something here. How does "upgrade only" relate to
> the our present discussion?


$ dub upgrade

That should be the only command that should call out to the web service 
by default, unless required.

This command reruns dependency resolution and things like that, which 
were already cached.