Tango development

[Sean Kelly]

Alix Pexton wrote:
> Kris wrote:
>> There's recently been a couple of notable threads that I recall over 
>> Tango, which have been entirely non-constructive, and revolved almost 
>> entirely around small details such as module naming conventions.  It's 
>> like there's some kind of fear and loathing seething under the 
>> surface. I'm wondering whether it's because Tango is not generally 
>> discussed in the ng at all. I mean, it is developed and maintained 
>> completely /outside/ of this ng environment. Is there some basis for 
>> this notion?
> 
> To me, it seems that both D and Tango are developed with a similar air 
> of secrecy, widly discussed by those that are interested in them, both 
> represented by their respective authors, but the process of decision 
> making vieled and mysterious.
> 
> Occasionally there are announcements of a new version, even more 
> occasionaly hints of new features upcoming, but no insight into the 
> process that has built them.

I can see how some people may feel this way.  However, the bulk of 
discussion actually takes place on #d.tango, and in many cases is driven 
by user issues with the library.

> Genuine enquiries about why Tango is like it is seem always to be met 
> with the same few responces, "come to IRC/Our Forum", "well, you have a 
> choice", dismissal of the issue as trivial and sometimes what seem to be 
> personal remarks that have no baring on the issue.

For the "come to irc/our forum" issue, I think the goal there is simply 
to be able to discuss the issue in a more natural manner in the former 
case, and so as not to forget about it in the latter case.  Kris, Lars, 
or I could enter tickets ourselves for issues described here, but often 
we don't understand the request well enough provide sufficient detail. 
That, and we're all somewhat overworked.

> The threads that involve Tango do tend to become drawn out, and the 
> hostility is not entirely one sided, but the only reason that the are, 
> as you say, non-constructive, is because there seems to be a reluctance 
> to even look at issues from the other side's point of view.

I tend to avoid arguments on this newsgroup.  If that makes me seem 
unresponsive, I apologize.


Sean