When will D1 be finished?

[Georg Wrede]

Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> Brad Roberts wrote:
>> On Tue, 12 May 2009, Walter Bright wrote:
>>
>>> Jason House wrote:
>>>> I've also wondered a bit about the impression people have of Walter
>>>> ignoring the things most important to them. Obviously, everyone can't
>>>> talk to Walter directly. I wonder if it would be possible to have
>>>> official delegates on specific aspects of D... People hand picked by
>>>> Walter as expert proxies. For example, changes to std.algorithm (and
>>>> all of Phobos?)  should go through Andrei. I have not tried to come
>>>> up with a list of categories. Having an exhaustive set of D-related
>>>> concerns ans officisl proxies would help focus discussion/efforts. It
>>>> also gives a way for a the most important concerns to be raised to
>>>> Walter directly through back channels such as coffee shop discussions
>>>> , phone calls, e-mail etc.
>>> I've been wondering if it's time for another D conference.
>>
>> I'm pretty sure I could offer the space again (I'd need to reserve the 
>> rooms far in advance).  Offering my time to schedule and gather 
>> speakers and people is what caused the last attempt to fizzle.  I'd be 
>> happy to setup the same signup page (and even enhance it if there's 
>> desires for it to do more) again.  Really, getting speakers committed 
>> and organized is the largest part of the work other than the actual 
>> event itself.
>>
>> If there's sufficient interest, and a range of dates chosen, I'll be 
>> glad to go see what I can arrange with our conferencing guys.
> 
> The stars are aligning themselves very nicely for a second D conference. 
> However, I would like to suggest a few changes this time around that are 
> aimed at improving the quality of the conference.
> 
> * All submissions will be reviewed by a committee. They must be 
> presented at least as abstract + slides for review. The committee will 
> reject weak submissions even though there might be "space" left. No more 
> "I think I can slap together something" this time around.

Yes.

> * The conference should not be free. This may seem odd, but I am 
> convinced that a non-free conference will end up being better than a 
> free one. There will be a cost that's reasonable but non-null. Speakers 
> will get appropriate discounts and transportation reimbursements, which 
> encourages competitiveness and also allows us to bring an outside 
> authority for e.g. a keynote talk.

However I'd like to dislike this idea, I simply have to agree.

> * We should put together one or more panels. I personally don't care 
> much for panels/roundtables/etc., but somehow most people love them. For 
> the state of D in particular, I believe the panel format will be very 
> appropriate.

For such a conference, what's needed is a panel with Walter, another 
with Andrei, with Don Clugston, with Sean Kelly, and then, if time 
allows, some panels with varying combinations of the three.

(What the headlines are for those, makes no difference! Folks will want 
to hear these people, period.)

> In short, I'd like to hold a real, good-quality conference.