Deprecating this(this)

[bachmeier]

On Monday, 2 April 2018 at 15:30:23 UTC, Paolo Invernizzi wrote:

> Andrei wrote in the message
>
>>I am looking for folks to assist me in creating a DIP for that.
>>There will be a _lot_ of work involved, so don't take it 
>>lightly.
>
> So, let's keep the discussion factual. I'm pretty sure that 
> every aspect will be taken in account and pondered prior to a 
> decision.
>
> I'm +1 on major breaking changes if they drive D towards a 
> better shape.

Andrei is asking others to write a DIP to formalize a decision he 
has already made. Yet when Manu posts here, he responds:

> The good news is there is a way to ensure your proposal gets a 
> fair shake of the stick: write a DIP.

> Filing a DIP is like filing a police report: once it's in the 
> system, we're obligated to work on it. There's a guarantee of a 
> response. In the case of acceptance, we commit to implementing 
> the proposal. In the case of rejection, we give a clear 
> motivation of the reasons we had. In the case we ask for 
> further review, we provide clear feedback of what would take 
> the DIP through another iteration.

> Forum discussions are the equivalent of complaining loudly in a 
> bar to people you know and also to strangers within earshot 
> that your house was broken into. Until you file a report, the 
> police will not look into it.

There's not even an attempt made to pretend there's symmetry. The 
only way for Manu (and basically anyone else) to propose a change 
is to write a DIP. Andrei won't even participate in discussions 
without a DIP. That's probably a good idea. What's not a good 
idea is to make unilateral decisions about major breaking 
changes, posting in the forum, and then asking others to write 
the DIP. That's corporate software development, and it's very 
discouraging to potential contributors.