The D AGM

[Nicholas Wilson]

I'm going to preface this by saying that I have/had no experience 
running an AGM and that there were a lot of topics

On Monday, 13 May 2019 at 05:27:00 UTC, Johan Coder wrote:
> - The DIPS discussion was too long.  DIP 1000 needs more 
> documentation but that should be one minute decision.

The problem was not that dip1000 was under-documented it was the 
process by which it happened, specifically on the reviewing side 
where there is no document to refer to what it is supposed to be 
doing.

> DIP 1015 is not very important, why discuss it again? All 
> languages have things like this and I like D bool more than 
> verbose Java boolean.

Because the entire community though that the decision and the 
chain of reasoning was... bad, to put it mildly, and we need a 
process in place for dealing with such an outcome.

> But it does not matter anyway!  DIP 1016 was the interesting 
> but was not discussed.

DIP 1016 was discussed a lot at the conference so there was less 
need to cover it in as much depth.

> No discussion about the DIPS pipeline which is the most 
> important!

I'm pretty sure that was discussed.

> In such meetings the moderator needs to control it, and they 
> did a poor job.

perhaps, again, first time doing it. The items were ordered by 
priority, so not so bad, but I take you point.

> - Meeting should not be with time limit.  All items must be 
> discussed and it ends when topics end.  Why only two hours for 
> so many items?

Alas, it was all we had. I originally wanted to split it over 
where the "Ask Us Anything" slot ended up and the Saturday 
morning, because I think that that is not a particularly useful 
session (and they serve similar roles), but apparently tradition 
demands that session. Though it will be interesting to see if it 
continues with Atila at the helm.

> - Items came in random order. If there is a time limit most 
> important topics must come first.

Again it was ordered by priority.

> Most meeting was on minor things!

I don't think that was the case. Keep in mind that other things 
were discussed throughout the conference.

> - Speaking of meeting moderator, who was that? Mike, Ethan or 
> Nick? The moderator/s did a bad job at making the meeting work.
>  One problem is Nick was not organized and difficult to 
> understand even.  More complicated is I don't understand Nicks 
> role.

I wrote the agenda.

> Was he chosen by the D foundation?  [Did] he appointed himself?
>  Anyone can do that by collecting a random list of popular 
> topics and saying he will hold an AGM?

Sort of, I submitted it as a DConf proposal. It was accepted.

> That would be an even bigger problem.

The fact that we had one is an achievement. I don't think it 
would have happened otherwise.

> If so I suggest he is replaced for next year.

Why, are you volunteering?

> This is my list.  It is in random order too!  Most important:  
> make time for all topics.  Discuss important topics first.  
> Moderation should limit time with the microphone and move the 
> meeting forward such that everything is discussed.

Noted.