The forked elephant in the room

[Dibyendu Majumdar]

On Tuesday, 16 January 2024 at 13:42:36 UTC, Don Allen wrote:
> On Tuesday, 16 January 2024 at 10:47:11 UTC, Dukc wrote:
>> On Tuesday, 16 January 2024 at 10:06:47 UTC, Atila Neves wrote:
>>> but it also can't be the case that the default is to merge 
>>> PRs unless "there's a reason not to".
>>
>> Why not? I get that such PRs are not necessarily net positives 
>> in purely technical sense, but if there's no reason not to 
>> merge them they can't be big technical negatives either.
>>
>> If accepting PRs like that helps to keep people around, then 
>> considering the morale effect, I'd argue merging such PRs is 
>> still a net positive.
>
> This is an excellent point that I think Walter and the others 
> who manage this project need to take very seriously. The 
> technical-social balance of this project is clearly skewed, the 
> evidence being a long-term pattern of talented people heading 
> for the exits.

Not at all a good idea. The D team is the gate keeper of the 
language and have to ensure that each feature integrates with the 
whole. Saying yes to every feature by default is complete 
madness. There is a huge cost to every new feature.

Worth watching https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gXdS3IftP0Y

D is arguably already too full of features because of trying to 
please everyone.
As someone argued, its better to focus on quality rather than 
features at this stage.