why a part of D community do not want go to D2 ?

[Steven Schveighoffer]

On Wed, 10 Nov 2010 05:51:19 -0500, Jacob Carlborg <doob at me.com> wrote:

> Of course that would be the preferred way, there should have been some  
> kind of agreement for this (maybe there was but never fulfilled?) But  
> you also have to look at it from Tangos point of view. Why would Tango  
> drop support for anything that isn't DMD 32bit? Or should Tango keep  
> half of it's runtime in it's own repository and for the other half use  
> druntime.

I think this is the whole point of Jacob's that is being missed -- Tango  
supports LDC, GDC, and DMD, and druntime supports only DMD.  When druntime  
first was developed, it was a clone of Tango's runtime, but only with dmd  
support.  I can't remember why support for the other compilers was  
removed, but I don't think it was malicious in nature, I think it was a  
point of maintenance or lack of ownership.  I would expect that if someone  
wanted to support druntime for Tango (BTW, the D1 branch is still in  
druntime, just 2 years old) with LDC and GDC support, I don't think Sean  
would object.  But I can't speak for Sean...

But this aside, there was never any point for Tango to adopt druntime --  
phobos 1 was not going to adopt it, and Tango is not going to be ported to  
D2.  Compatibility is an academic pipe dream that will never occur.

-Steve