Isn't it about time for D3?

[Sebastien Alaiwan via Digitalmars-d]

On Tuesday, 13 June 2017 at 17:57:14 UTC, Patrick Schluter wrote:
> Before even contemplating a big disrupting language split like 
> proposed by the OP, wouldn't it first more appropriate to write 
> a nice article, DIP, blog, whatever, listing the defects of the 
> current language that can not be solved by progressive 
> evolution?
> I haven't the impression that the *language* itself suffer from 
> so big flaws that it would warrant to fork it in a way that 
> will lead to a lot frustration and bewilderment.
> D is not perfect, no question, but it is not in a state that 
> would jusrify such a harsh approach.

+1
Does anyone currently maintain somewhere such a list of 
not-gonna-be-fixed-in-D2 defects?
This might provide more solid grounds to this discussion.