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

[Daniel Gibson]

Andrew Wiley schrieb:
> 
> 
> On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 5:27 PM, Daniel Gibson <metalcaedes at gmail.com 
> <mailto:metalcaedes at gmail.com>> wrote:
> 
>     Andrew Wiley schrieb:
> 
> 
>         One thought here:
>         If Tango is still useful in the D world but there isn't too much
>         enthusiasm about porting it to D2, why not break its
>         functionality (that isn't already in Phobos 2) down into a set
>         of supplemental libraries that can be included as needed?
> 
> 
>     Or just put it in one library and call it "Tango2" or something like
>     that ;)
> 
>     (To allow porting of all kinds of Tango programs, about every Tango
>     class would have to be ported to D2 anyway, so one could just as
>     well do a proper port. Because of druntime it could coexist with
>     Phobos2 - which was really the point of druntime for D2.
>     Unfortunately nobody wanted to do this hitherto).
> 
> 
> It's also worthy of note that I wasn't addressing the porting of Tango 
> programs specifically. The modular approach does lose there. 
> 

I thought with "[...] the functionality and APIs provided by Tango is still 
available as needed, and porting becomes something that can easily be done 
incrementally."
you meant porting Tango programs to D2, I'm sorry if I misunderstood.

I guess having some Tango modules (e.g. for Streams or XML) for D2 may be 
useful, until there are an adequate alternatives in Phobos.. but it would most 
probably harm the acceptance of these alternatives, once they're ready.