The Death of D. (Was Tango vs Phobos)

[Yigal Chripun]

Walter Bright wrote:
> Yigal Chripun wrote:
>> In this Specific case:
>> Walter needs his name on all the Phobos code and he stated his valid
>> reasons for it. Tango developers want their names on the Tango code and
>> rightly so, since they wrote it. in case of a merger of those two code
>> bases you get one joint code base but *two* teams that want their name
>> on the code. someone has to be first.
> 
> No, I do not "need my name" on the Phobos code. I have no interest in
> taking credit for others' work. As I have stated previously, the idea
> here is to:
> 
> 1. To ensure Phobos is free of any legal taint and any accusations of
> stealing code.
> 
> 2. To avoid the untenable issue of a single module in Phobos having
> different license for different lines of code.
> 
> It is not an issue of credit, I have no problem with (and strongly
> encourage) the people who wrote the code having their name in it and
> taking credit.
> 
> At one point, Brad was trying to do some merging and was accused of
> "stealing" from Tango. I was told later that this was in jest, but this
> kind of thing cannot be taken lightly. Phobos needs to be squeaky clean
> in the legal department.
> 
> I have done my part and have provided an explicit, clear, and
> unambiguous license for Tango to use whatever parts of Phobos they need
> and to put it under the Tango license (for all the parts for which I
> have a right to do so). All I ask is for a reciprocal agreement.

Walter,
from my POV which is that of a user, all I see is a huge storm in a cup
of water from a year ago.
I do not take a side in this nor do I care for the issues both sides
raise. as I've said in my previous post which is quoted in this post
already and I'll quote here again "[Walter] stated his valid reasons".
So you see, I do not question your reasons. All I see as a user is that
Steven compared the licenses and they're almost Identical, Sean Kelly
has given you permission to all his code and I see his posts and see no
reason this hasn't been solved a year ago.

I'm a user. I should not care if contributer A insulted/jested with
Developer B.

Since you do not have any issues with giving credit (where it is due)
and Sean gave you a free hand with all his code, All of your points
above are achieved in regard to the runtime.
You want more prove to see the authors of the runtime? Check the version
control logs.
But really, unless this issue is solved and solved *soon*, both versions
of D are a dead end. This is far more important to resolve than any new
feature in D2.

again, as an average user that just want to use D, I can happily live
without array ops, native thread local memory and other features for a
few months, But I really must insist that D needs a standardized runtime
library, now. otherwise I have no use for D at all no matter what fancy
tricks it has under its sleeves.

The only thing left to say is that this should be handled in the same
way a pope is selected:
all cardinals gather in his room and they are not allowed to leave this
room until a new pope is selected which is signaled by white smoke.
(I've been to Italy and the guide showed us where it supposed to come from).
this is what currently needed to solve this. put everything else aside
(both you and the Tango devs) and give us white smoke. until I see that
white smoke coming from this NG, I (and I'm sure many others) will see
no future in D.