std.experimental – DConf?

[Dicebot via Digitalmars-d]

On Thursday, 29 May 2014 at 22:16:09 UTC, Joseph Rushton Wakeling 
via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On 29/05/14 20:46, Dmitry Olshansky via Digitalmars-d wrote:
>> Personally I believe that anything not stable enough simply 
>> wouldn't work
>> sitting in Phobos. The release cycle is like 4? months, 
>> patches need review (by
>> whom? if its just smb's experiment).
>> And there is the question of keeping 2 forks of the project - 
>> one for
>> code.dlang.org and the other for std.experimental.
>
> If something's made it to std.experimental, is there any reason 
> why there needs to be a maintained version in code.dlang.org 
> ... ?

Because author of the module does not control Phobos and 
experimental stuff means, well, experiments.

> As for cycle -- surely an option here is to have a faster 
> Phobos-only release cycle that brings in updates _only_ of 
> experimental modules.

Lot of extra work for already solved problem. Not going to fly.

Really, concept of experimental packages in standard libraries is 
one of those ideas that always seem good initially but has never 
worked good out there not for a single language. It is simply an 
incompatible concept.