Dan Korostelev

As mentioned in https://github.com/HaxeFoundation/haxelib/pull/135#issuecomment-163228477, I think we should adopt NPM dependency format, see https://docs.npmjs.com/files/package.json#dependencies.

That is interesting stuff, thanks!

The npm tool itself doesn't support anything but git, but the URL format looks extensible enough (e.g. `hg+http://...` similar to supported-by-npm `git+http://...`.

As discussed in #105, it would be also nice to support `http://...` urls, which is also supported by NPM. I propose we borrow npm's url format and use it for...

This raises more questions: should we / how to store multiple versions of a library checked out from some vcs. For example, library A declares `"somelib": "git://some/lib#rev1"` dependency which is...

I'm yet to look at the code, but the proposition looks nice. I agree about expanding `haxelib.json` purpose so it's not only used for "libraries", but for projects in general,...

I'm looking at the code right now. Can't say I like it very much, but that's not about your part, but haxelib codebase in general. I think if we decide...

Anyway, I can't think of any issues regarding the proposed syntax.

> I can look into the subdir devmode problem later. But for me this subdir stuff sounds a bit nasty anyway. I prefer one repository for one lib, so why...

Well, the good thing is that we can release haxelib separately. In fact, there's an [issue](https://github.com/HaxeFoundation/haxelib/issues/231) about that.