questions on PhanTango 'merger' (was Merging Tangobos into Tango)

[Alexander Panek]

Don Clugston wrote:
> Seems to me, that there are actually TWO phobos-es (phobi ?).
> There's "core phobos", (std.file, etc) which has the basic i/o.
> There's also "complete phobos" which includes some disorganised stuff 
> which has far more limited appeal (std.openrj, std.base64, std.uri, etc).
> Seems to me that when people talk about phobos-vs-tango, it's core 
> phobos which has the biggest appeal, and the extended phobos which is 
> most disliked.
> Could phobos be trimmed down to this core set?
> (Make the extended phobos be available as a separate download, or at 
> least clearly distinguished?)

I like that idea. This way a compatibility between Tango and the Phobos 
core would be easier to achieve, I suppose. Higher level stuff (like you 
said: std.openrj, std.base64, etc.) could as well be based on a 
compatibility layer that defines a standard interface for Threads, I/O & 
co that applies for both, Phobos' core and Tango's core.

This could even open the possibility for other runtime libraries (on top 
of that layer) or runtime library replacements (GC, Threads, .. like 
Tango now) without losing compatibility.