Tango development

[Alix Pexton]

Sean Kelly wrote:
> 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

I prefer to be able to take my time and consider how I word my opinions and views very carefully, this does not lend itself well to IRC. When one stops to think there, oneis iften harried and poked...

I prefer unresponsive to argument, but I prefer debate to unresponsive, I don't think this is a uncommon or unusual view.

A...