[OffTopic] A vulnerability postmortem on Network Security Services

[Greg Strong]

On Sunday, 5 December 2021 at 18:24:22 UTC, rikki cattermole 
wrote:
> This is in a pretty awkward position. Community is ok if it has 
> this one change, but we don't know what Walter's position is on 
> an amended DIP would be. There are some sour feelings here I 
> think still.

Thanks, Rikki, for your quick and frank reply.  This is what I 
feared.  No one wants to put in significant effort, 
understandably, when there is a good chance it will be 
unilaterally killed even if the entire rest of the community is 
in favor.

D has a real problem.  On the one hand, we have problems moving 
forward.  No need to reiterate those.  But, on the other hand, 
there is no long-term-support (LTS) release, nor so far as I 
know, any plans for an LTS release, so you can't rely on the 
current state either.  This makes D only useful for hobby 
programming.

I know there are plans for a new model of governance.  I hope 
that helps.  But I have so far seen nothing on these forums that 
gives me confidence.

@Mike Parker, here's a clear opportunity for the new governance 
model to sink-or-swim.  It seems the entire community, except for 
Walter, wants this but it has been unilaterally killed.  Can we 
move forward?  If you need me to do the paperwork, I will.  If 
this still cannot go forward under the new model, then the new 
model must be considered a failure and it's time to move on.