dumblob

Btw imho the best packaging tool I've ever seen is GNU Guix - it's worth looking at it's core principles to get an impression how complicated packaging could get eventually...

Well, I've right now tried to quickly come up with something feasible yet KISS and I've ended up with a similar (but still a simpler) system as `npm`. I.e. -...

> how do you propose to organize versioning? It's pretty simple to identify package changeset by its hash, but I don't see a straightforward way to attribute custom version strings...

> And yet again, it would be fairly trivial to maintain several "types" of the same package in a single repository using branching. The "type" can thus be easily unified...

> Alone they don't make any sense unless there is something else associated with "type". So far we have only 3 types (disjunct sets of versions). And it does make...

> Forgot to answer that. No one really knows what everything WinAPI allows. My, I should try myself in poetry :) And what about knowing _what everything WinAPI allows_ in...

> A dependency file is added for each package; Each line in this composes of a package (fossil repo) name and a fossil tag name Why not to use directly...

> I believe they are equivalent to URIs. Yes, they are valid URIs, but what I meant was that if I want to specify a dependency, I have a specific...

Btw the size of the git repository is really big. Couldn't that be caused by the synchronization fossil->git?

> which essentially excludes any chance for someone to host a repository at GitHub. I'm not convinced about this as long as we retain URIs with `schema`, i.e. with `git:`...