An open question to Rebuild users

[Jesse Phillips]

On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 07:20:31 +1000, Derek Parnell wrote:

> On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 21:31:24 +0200, torhu wrote:
> 
>> Derek Parnell wrote:
>>> On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 12:51:24 -0700, Gregor Richards wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Why use rebuild and not DSSS?
>>> 
>>> Actually, there is (at least) one person that uses neither <G>
>>> 
>> 
>> Make that two.  Any bud development going on?
> 
> Yes, there is quite a bit done since the last release. 
> 
> I have been waiting to deliberately allow Rebuild some time to gain
> momentum and maturity before continuing to offer an alternative. I feel it
> might have been unfair to 'compete' while it was still formative.
> 
> Though I admit I haven't even downloaded or looked at Rebuild to know what
> it can or can't do. As for DSSS, I don't know what the problem is it is
> trying to solve so I don't know if I need to use it or not.
>

is rebuild and bud really competing? I just thought rebuild was just
trying to but the il back in bud. No seriously, I thought it just
a modified bud to work more closely with dsss. I suppose I should ask what
is the benefits to rebuild to bud? Was it Gregor's intent to fork bud as a
competitor? And maybe what prevents bud from having that which is added to
rebuild?

As for DSSS I love the concept that it provides. I'm not doing any major
projects, everything I have done fits nicely in one file. However I have
done multiple file stuff and still find dmd easy enough to use. But if I
were to create and distribute D software, I would definitely go with
distributing it in a dsss compatible format.