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

[Dukc]

On Tuesday, 26 April 2022 at 11:37:51 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
> On Tuesday, 26 April 2022 at 11:00:26 UTC, JN wrote:
>> Yes, it is limiting, and that is it's strength. With 
>> boundaries comes reliability and consistency.
>
> Don't fart on me and tell me it's Channel.
>
> Here the simple truth. Either the build is
> 1/ simple in which case `dmd -i` is enough and dub superfluous.
> 2/ complex in which case dub's "strength" is that it is too 
> limiting to do it.
>
> You are getting real D users, people who have been using it for 
> many many years, telling you dub is creating more problem for 
> them that it solves.

You're approaching this from the wrong perspective. Dub isn't for 
packaging an arbitrary project as effortlessly as possible. Use 
rpm/apt/ports/flatpak/snap/nix/chocolatey/etc for that.

Dub is for packaging a pure D application, library or wrapper so 
that anyone with a D compiler can compile your D code as easily 
as possible. The idea is that the user does not need anything but 
Dub and a D compiler to build a DUB package. If you require 
something beyond that, you're using Dub for a purpose it's not 
intended to. It's more about the user and less about the packager.