What's missing from Phobos for Orbit (package manager)

[sclytrack]

On Friday, 15 February 2013 at 06:44:57 UTC, Dmitry Olshansky 
wrote:
> 15-Feb-2013 01:49, Jacob Carlborg пишет:
>> On 2013-02-14 21:33, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
>> [snip]
>>> Regardless I think reducing dependencies is the important for 
>>> inclusion
>>> of any new component into the "D core".
>>
>> In general I think that the D community should embrace all
>> developers/contributors and existing libraries.
>
> Not talking about your stuff in particular but in general - 
> hell no. There is a line between accepting everything just 
> because we can't lose the chance (hence current std.xml, 
> std.json and other crappy stuff) and accepting decent stuff 
> that was specifically following current Phobos idoms, was 
> reviewed, etc. The latter puts quite a strain on the 
> contributor and in the end should guarantee the quality of 
> addition (and commitment to maintain it).
>
> That being said once package manager is there tested and solid 
> 3-rd party libs will flow. (tested & solid simply because of 
> greater exposure factor)
>
>> It cannot afford to
>> loose contributions for petty things like this.
>
> I'd say if contributor can't be bothered to follow conventions 
> and deal with the constraints imposed, just let him go. 
> Coherency is all important in the core part of pretty much 
> anything.


When is D going to officially release with official third party 
libraries? Like synchronized with the release of dmd and bundled 
together in a huge (as large as possible) compressed file. Like 
Derelict, Gtkd, Qtd, Vibe, Apache Thrift. I mean not included in 
phobos but included in the release.