Convert std.random to a package

[HaraldZealot via Digitalmars-d]

On Wednesday, 24 June 2015 at 14:16:04 UTC, Jonathan M Davis 
wrote:
> On Wednesday, 24 June 2015 at 12:15:10 UTC, Joseph Rushton 
> Wakeling wrote:
>> Hello all,
>>
>> As I promised at DConf (though sadly arriving a bit later than 
>> I'd hoped), I've submitted a PR to convert std.random to a 
>> package:
>> https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/pull/3406
>>
>> I'd like to ask for some attention to this because, first, I 
>> think it's important that we agree that this particular 
>> package structure is correct/logical, and second, I really 
>> don't want to have to rework this if anyone commits to 
>> std.random in the meanwhile ;-)
>>
>> Beyond perhaps documentation issues I hope this PR should be 
>> fairly non-controversial and easy to approve (or disapprove).
>
> Is there any point in doing this if we're going to be 
> redesigning std.random as you've been working on? In fact, it 
> could get in the way of that, since we could potentially just 
> make the new version be modules in the package, and the old 
> version be in std.random.package (meaning that if you imported 
> std.random, you get the old, deprecated stuff, and if you 
> import std.random.foo, you get the new stuff).
>
> - Jonathan M Davis

Please not such way. Idea with package 'experimental' and 
'deprecated' looks like more preferable.

(This idea was discussed in std.container fork. For example new 
random API go to std.experimental.random all old API remain in 
std.random, when stable state of new API was approved that 
renaming happens: std.random -> std.deprecated.random and in next 
DMD/Phobos release std.experimental.random -> std.random. Also 
were good provide with new release tool that autofix stuff like 
this)