New DIP Rules

claptrap clap at trap.com
Wed Jul 22 09:56:54 UTC 2020


On Wednesday, 22 July 2020 at 08:20:37 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
> In response to the controversy over the acceptance of DIP 1028
>
> Henceforth, when a language maintainer wants to write a DIP, he 
> will instead recruit someone to write it for him. This third 
> party will not just be the DIP author, he or she will be the 
> champion of the DIP. The idea is that the maintainer provides 
> the author with the broad outline (bullet points, notes, 
> whatever works) and any input necessary to get the initial 
> draft off the ground, but the author is ultimately responsible 
> for the content, including modifying the additional draft as 
> they see fit, and deciding which bits of community feedback to 
> incorporate and which to ignore throughout the DIP process. 
> (All such DIPs will include a note that the idea came from a 
> maintainer.)

This is utterly pointless, it's still the maintainers DIP in all 
but name, the self interest in seeing it pass is still there 100%.

The problem could have been avoided, Walter knew that 1028 was 
going to be massively unpopular, he said he was expecting the 
backlash. But he steamrollered it through anyway.

What he could have done is ask Andrei to take his place as a 
reviewer given he knew how controversial the DIP was. Or he could 
have let Atila come to a decision by himself.

Both of those would have been better than what happened, or what 
is now proposed.


> * /Walter didn't listen to the feedback./ There is a difference 
> between listening to feedback and disagreeing with feedback.

Why then did Andrei manage to change Walters mind when the 
community couldn't? Andrei didn't say anything that hadn't 
already been said 100 times.

Simple fact is either Walter didn't take the time to understand 
what the community was saying / or he didn't value what they said.




More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list