Broken links continue to exist on major pages on dlang.org

[Adam D. Ruppe via Digitalmars-d]

On Thursday, 2 June 2016 at 20:34:24 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu 
wrote:
> Interestingly it came as encouraging and empowering some 
> fledgling work that had compelling things going for it 
> (including but not limited to enthusiastic receipt in this 
> forum), which ironically is exactly what you just asked for.

Yes, indeed, it was a good first (and second) step. But further 
steps are necessary too in order to finish a project.

Here's what would have been ideal to me:

1) Someone writes a cool thing.

2) We encourage further exploration and see interest.

3) After deciding there's serious potential, we decide on the end 
goal, a timeframe, and set the conditions of success. For 
example: ddox becomes the official documentation generator at the 
end of the year if there are no major bugs remaining open.

4) We put it on the website and work toward the goal, with all 
the teams - Phobos, dlang.org, RejectedSoftware, etc., 
understanding their role.

5) When the goal deadline arrives, if it passes the major bug 
test, it goes live and we are committed to it going forward.



Why this order? First, someone writing the cool thing means we 
actually have something to sink our teeth into and a de facto 
champion in the original author.

Second, we need to incubate this work and not discourage the 
author.

ddox got a decent go up to here.

But then we need to decide what's next - a clear goal, including 
a due date, gets us all aligned and removes a lot of the 
uncertainty on the author's side; it is some reassurance that 
they aren't wasting their time, and encourages outside teams to 
get onboard.

That leads directly into step four, and then step five actually 
proves that the others were not in vain.