Vision 2016 H1

[Joakim via Digitalmars-d]

On Monday, 25 January 2016 at 22:12:06 UTC, Andrew Edwards wrote:
> On Monday, 25 January 2016 at 16:20:50 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu 
> wrote:
>> On 01/25/2016 11:02 AM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
>>> I don't think we should read *too* much into the words.
>>
>> Yeah, it's interesting. I recall thinking as I was drafting 
>> the document: "One word... ONE word that doesn't sit well and 
>> it will be all about that word." And now here we are. It's 
>> like those presidential or Fed chairman press conferences... 
>> :o).
>>
>> I changed http://wiki.dlang.org/Vision/2016H1.
>>
>>
>> Andrei
>
> The bikeshed is now translucent... However, the community still 
> lacks focus/direction. Pick a destination, establish To-dos and 
> Milestones, empower the community to make it happen, then 
> supervise to ensure everyone stays on task.
>
> State the priority or at a least list of priorities. Everything 
> under the sun cannot be THE priority.
>
> e.g.
>    1. Improve Module System
>       -- To-dos
>       -- Milestones
>
>    2. Improve Memory Management
>       2.1 Garbage Collector
>           -- To-dos
>           -- Milestones
>
>       2.2 Manual Memory Management
>           -- To-dos
>           -- Milestones
>
>    3. Tools
>       3.1 Adapt dfmt
>           -- To-dos
>           -- Milestones
>
>       3.1 Adapt dfix
>           -- To-dos
>           -- Milestones

I've been asking for this list for sometime now.  It is actually 
what I wanted from the Vision document, but that ended up too 
broad and vague.  I've since repeatedly pointed out that it 
should be more specific, more like a roadmap, as you lay out.

> After stating the priority, identify the most capable resources 
> to head each initiative, empower them with a bit of autonomy 
> and encourage the larger community to organize in support of 
> these initiatives.

These people will tend to be self-selected, but they could always 
be given some leeway in a named role.

> Finally, supervise!!!

I doubt this would ever happen: Walter and Andrei are not 
managers, and I doubt OSS contributors would want it.  The best 
one can do is define a roadmap and hope it's heeded.

I wanted to say this earlier but forgot: what D is trying to do 
is impossible.  You cannot have a successful OSS project that has 
a high technical standard and no commercial backing.  OSS 
projects tend to be more like ruby and rails, where most anything 
goes.  Projects with a high technical standard have to be more 
selective, so they go against the OSS grain.  When that happens 
in OSS, it's usually because of commercial backing.

It is amazing that D has gotten so far as an OSS project without 
commercial backing, a credit to the engineering sense of Walter 
and the core team.  But I don't think you can organize your way 
around that fundamental obstacle.

Of course, I'd likely have said OSS being so widespread would be 
impossible a couple decades ago, but OSS has certainly garnered a 
niche, once it was coupled with commercial models.