Females in the community.

[Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d]

On 03/24/2016 01:07 PM, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
> On Thursday, 24 March 2016 at 16:46:53 UTC, Bruno Medeiros wrote:
>> It is, *however*, illustrative of a larger issue I have with the
>> mindset and attitude of the core D team: that there are several
>> aspects there that I consider antiquated, or narrow-minded. Please
>> don't take this as a personal offense Walter, it's not meant as such.
>> But:
>
> Sorry, but this is complete FUD.
>
>> Not understanding the importance of package managers is another (DUB
>> still not part of official distro?) Compare with Rust's Cargo.
>
> Dub is not part of the distro because the Dub maintainers don't consider
> it ready. Everyone wants it packaged. We are waiting for it to
> stabilize. If you want to help, start with
> https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dub/issues.
>
>> Not understanding the importance of IDE tooling is another. Compare
>> with Rust planned support for IDE tooling from the Mozilla team
>> itself. (https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/1317-ide.md)
>
> No, this is completely understood. We simply do not have the resources
> for that. I think we've done everything reasonable to promote Visual D,
> for example - it's linked from the website, it's in the GitHub
> organization, it's in the installer, what more do you want? Unlike
> Mozilla, we can't hire people to work on things full-time.
>
>> Even the fact that we are using custom web forum software (Vladimir's
>> forum) draws a strong parallel with the DigitalMars vs. LLVM backend
>> story.
>
> No.
>
>> I mean, Vladimir's forum is an impressive piece of work, and it's a
>> really good demo of D's capabilities. That said, it's the work of 1-2
>> people, it cannot stand against the capabilities and polish of
>> something like Discourse which is developed by a much bigger team, and
>> used by many different organizations.
>
> I take offense to that.
>
> In the same way that forum.dlang.org can never have some of Discourse's
> features by its nature, Discourse can never have some of forum.dlang.org
> features. The Discourse's team's priorities are different (for example,
> they put much less emphasis on responsiveness, resource usage,
> interoperability, or multiple forms of presentation).
>
> Perhaps you could list some particular features you're missing.

Many thanks Vladimir for a very good post. Last part made me smile 
because it reminded me of the many arguments constructed around "nobody 
can compete with IBM/Microsoft/ICEs/taxis/etc because they have market 
share/money/larger teams/lobbying power/etc" -- Andrei