Before we implement SDL package format for DUB

[Nick Sabalausky via Digitalmars-d]

On 8/25/2014 6:14 PM, Idan Arye wrote:
> On Monday, 25 August 2014 at 16:40:10 UTC, Jonathan Marler wrote:
>> Hello everyone,
>>
>> I've been working on SDL support for DUB and wanted to get some
>> people's opinions on whether we should really use SDL.  I've posted my
>> thoughts here:
>> http://forum.rejectedsoftware.com/groups/rejectedsoftware.dub/thread/2263/
>>
>
> You said that "The standard way to read a dub package description is to
> use the output of "dub describe", not to parse dub.json directly", but
> what about tools that *write* to dub.json?

...They *continue* writing to dub.json just as before?

I don't see the problem. "dub describe" isn't going to magically start 
failing just because it was a machine that wrote to dub.json instead of 
a human.

You did catch the part where people keep saying that support for JSON is 
*not going anywhere*, right?

 > Currently, if an IDE wants to
> use DUB behind the scenes as it's build system it can parse dub.json and
> modify it as it wishes, and that should even work if someone modified
> dub.json by hand. But what if someone modifies dub.json by hand and adds
> ASON stuff to it?

Again, use "dub describe" to read the data, then write to "dub.{whatever}".

 > I think we need a command like `dub normalize` that'll

"dub describe"

> convert the dub.json file into a pure JSON file

"dub describe"

 >that has exactly the
> same data, so IDEs could call it before loading dub.json.
>

I don't see the problem.