I hate new DUB config format

[Brad Roberts via Digitalmars-d]

On 11/25/15 11:40 AM, Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Wednesday, 25 November 2015 at 19:29:43 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
>> On Wednesday, 25 November 2015 at 19:18:25 UTC, Brad Anderson wrote:
>>> Tools should be querying dub directly instead of trying to read the package format.
>>
>> Shouldn't this be true of writing it too? Like I said on irc earlier today, I actually kinda think
>> we should have some kind of gui for it, or at least a command suite (like `dub add-dependency foo`
>> maybe, idk) so the file itself never needs to be touched directly by users for common tasks.
>
> While having a GUI might be nice, we're talking about a config file here. This is exactly the sort
> of thing that's normally edited by hand. It should be both writable and readable by both programmers
> and programs.
>
> - Jonathan M Davis

I'm not well steeped in the DUB eco-system, but isn't it more than just a config file?  It's really 
more of an interface file, right?  Config files are internal to apps, and this is shared between 
packages and the central registry.

For those saying that one should use DUB as the only access method to this date, are you serious? 
People (and applications) should have to execute an app to interrogate the data store?  Can you name 
a few other config files you do that with?  One of the only ones I can think of is the windows 
registry, and that's an api, not an app.

Later,
Brad