On 19/03/2011 14:36, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2011-03-18 18:04, Chris Manning wrote:
On 17/03/2011 22:49, Jason E. Aten wrote:
Somewhat tongue in cheek, we could call it dabal.
As in, "get on dabal!" :-)
If D gets accepted for Google Summer of Code, I think this would be a
great idea for a project and I would be interested in implementing it as
a student. Although, it does seem overly ambitious so maybe only some of
this could be for the gsoc (and if I do this It'd be great to carry on
working on it anyway).
What does everybody think about this? Should I draw up a proposal of
some kind?
Chris
I've been thinking for quite some time to build a package management
system for D, lets call it dpac as an example. This is the ideas that I
have:
Basically copy how RubyGems works.
Use Ruby as a DSL for dpacsepc files which is used to create to create
the dpac file. This is an example for how a file used to build a package
could look like:
name "Foo Bar"
summary "This is the Foo Bar package"
version "1.0.0"
type :lib
author "Jacob Carlborg"
files ["lib.d"] # list of the files in the package
build :make # other options could be :dsss :cmake and so on
dversion 2 # D1 or D2
Build a dpac package out of the dpacspec file:
dpac foobar.dpacspec
Publish the package:
$ dpac publish foobar
Install the package:
$ dpac install foobar
A dpac package would just be a zip file (or some other type of archive)
containing all the necessary files to build the package and a file with
meta data.
All packages would be manged on a basic RESTful web server. Using GET to
download a package and POST to publish a package.
I'm working on a build system for D that I was thinking about to
integrate with the package management system. Then the build system
could track the files needed to build the package, making the "files"
attribute optional.
I also has a tool called DVM, https://bitbucket.org/doob/dvm , used for
installing and managing different versions of D compilers. I was
thinking about integrating DVM with the package management system to be
able to install different packages for different compilers.
I was thinking about something more similar to portage's ebuild system
or arch's AUR. This would mean that the sources could be stored anywhere
and just the info to build a package would be stored in a centralised
location.
For publishing these build "scripts", again, AUR's system comes to mind,
although perhaps something more controll(ed/able). Also, gentoo's
sunrise overlay.
Of course, this comes with the downside of the user having to compile
the packages on their end.
Chris
