D versionning

[nazriel]

On Monday, 16 July 2012 at 01:06:16 UTC, Adam Wilson wrote:
> On Sun, 15 Jul 2012 18:01:41 -0700, Andrei Alexandrescu 
> <SeeWebsiteForEmail at erdani.org> wrote:
>
>> On 7/15/12 7:15 PM, Patrick Stewart wrote:
>>> We are coming back to dsource&  Tango graveyard story. D had 
>>> equally
>>> capable and large community to. Its resources got wasted. 
>>> People
>>> left. Huge amount of work just wasted for nothing.
>>
>> Actually a couple of weeks ago I was curious and collected a 
>> few statistics about the frequency of posts, number of 
>> posters, and such. The numbers are not yet in shape to be 
>> published, but from what I gathered so far there was no 
>> visible glitch around the D1/D2 divergence. There's a strong 
>> increase since 2011, but I couldn't yet gather an exponential 
>> trend.
>>
>>> On the other hand,
>>> Python has one of the largest *operational* standard library 
>>> and tons
>>> of 3rd party ones. Why? Because with stable language, all 
>>> those
>>> libraries stayed in the game.
>>
>> Agreed, we have much to learn from Python and other successful 
>> languages.
>>
>> I assume those procedures and protocols materialized together 
>> with strong growth of the community, and may be difficult to 
>> transplant to our team. Right now my main focus as an 
>> organizer is to make sure people's cycles are spent on 
>> productive, high-impact work. Right now Walter is working on 
>> Win64, which is of very high impact. A change of procedure 
>> right now would simply mean time taken away from that task.
>>
>> Finally, since you are interested in effecting durable 
>> positive change in D's development, I'll venture that perhaps 
>> you're not going the best way about it. Your posts attempt 
>> almost with no exception to inflame, and there's no 
>> contribution I know of in your name. That all reduces the 
>> credibility of your points, however merit there may be in them.
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Andrei
>
> I would like to state that I am all for waiting onr Win64; it's 
> a huge project and trying to do this change in the middle of it 
> would be the height of stupidity. However, directly after Win64 
> goes live I move that we make the dual branch model the default 
> going forward as it solves too many long-standing community 
> complaints to reasonably dismiss.

+1

I think that model proposed by deadalnix would drastically 
increase productivity  of D development cycle and would cover 
needs of those who like to feel "stable" with their software.

Lets learn from bigger, successful projects :)