Top 5

[Jarrett Billingsley]

On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 10:38 PM, Bill Baxter <wbaxter at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 11:22 AM, bearophile <bearophileHUGS at lycos.com> wrote:
>> Bill Baxter:
>>> But as a meta-wish I  heartily agree with whoever it was who said the
>>> development process needs to be made more open.
>>
>> I hope it's not wrong to show this link here:
>> http://www.digitalmars.com/webnews/newsgroups.php?art_group=digitalmars.D&article_id=77168
>>
>
> To those more directly involved: Would I be wrong saying the
> Phobos/Tango split never would have happened if D had a truly open
> development process?  I know Sean wanting to experiment with different
> GCs was one reason for it, but if Sean had been able to get access to
> the official D runtime to begin with, I suspect he would have designed
> his extensions in a way that was more compatible with the existing
> code.  Let me know if I'm way off base there.
>
> --bb
>

There probably never would have been a split.  If the community
developed (or had a major hand in developing) the standard library,
there would have been no reason to create an alternate.