DMD needs branches

[Marcin Kuszczak]

Chris Miller wrote:

> 
> I've had all this in the back of my mind for quite some time and I've
> tried to be patient about it. I'm not trying threaten anyone, but I don't
> know how much longer I'm going to put up with D with its current methods.
> Note that I am probably one of the oldest D users still using it.
> 

I agree with you. 

Additionally I think there are some really good Open Source ways of working
which are much more productive than current way of developing D. I mean
e.g. SVN repository (encourages to prepare patches), some kind of tracking
of enhancement requests (better than bugzilla), better way of packaging
compiler with standard library (I really can not get clue why linux and
windows versions of dmd are mixed in one packages; additionally breaking
packages into DMD/DMC while have same merits is not very user friendly),
more people with "write rights" for DMD/Phobos, eventually even help for
Tango people (e.g. bundling it with DMD or support in DMD for other
standard libraries not just Phobos).

I can live with current state, but I am sure that definitely using good
standards from other successfull projects would help D much more than super
hyper new features. (I am not against constness, as it look as very
important feature, but macros... well...). There are also some rough edges
in D which should be polished probably with higher priority than adding new
features...

Just a few additional thoughts...

-- 
Regards
Marcin Kuszczak (Aarti_pl)
-------------------------------------
Ask me why I believe in Jesus - http://zapytaj.dlajezusa.pl (en/pl)
Doost (port of few Boost libraries) - http://www.dsource.org/projects/doost/
-------------------------------------