Dlist and dip1000 challenge

[Nicholas Wilson]

On Thursday, 25 October 2018 at 00:20:17 UTC, Bastiaan Veelo 
wrote:
> On Wednesday, 24 October 2018 at 01:31:33 UTC, Walter Bright 
> wrote:
>> On 10/23/2018 4:56 PM, Nicholas Wilson wrote:
>>> He doesn't need to, I did it for him: 
>>> https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/8504
>>> He just needs to review it.
>>
>> https://github.com/dlang/dlang.org/pull/2453
>>
>> While I thank and appreciate you for doing this work, and 
>> especially for taking the initiative instead of just 
>> complaining, I don't think that modifying a DIP that has 
>> already been approved is appropriate process. It should be a 
>> PR against the spec. Approved specs should be immutable.
>
> [...]
>
> With all due respect,

I'm pretty sure all respect is past its dues on this, but 
anyway...

> why wasn't this brought forward as a comment on the PR back in 
> August?

I don't know, Walter hasn't bothered to reply.

> (And it _is_ a PR against the spec, is it not?)

Technically yes. But what should we document, the spec or the 
status quo?

> I feel embarrassed for the image that is being presented 
> outwards, which is one of central people being incapable of 
> working together. I don't understand what is going on; how 
> could the language evolve this far and what has changed? Do we 
> have too much regulation and procedures or too little?

> Isn't Walter's explanation in bugzilla enough this time to 
> review his PR and keep the language improving while procedures 
> are being improved on in parallel?

dlang/dmd#8346 dlang/dmd#8408 were merged on the understanding 
that the documentations changes would follow (this is indeed 
sometimes a useful pattern so we went through with it).

For dlang/dmd#8504 without the documentation we simply cannot 
review it, on principle and in practice. The principle sets a bad 
example which I can only guess that Walter will keep doing. The 
practical is that if we do not understand the PR there is no way 
we can review it.

> I feel like people are keeping a stiff foot for far too long.

Walter is the critical point on the critical path at the moment.

> Stagnation in development is bad enough, but this image really 
> hurts me. I count on you, I want you guys to shine. I see all 
> these talented musicians, but the conductor is not on his 
> podium.

That is a very apt analogy, you should talk to the conductor. I 
hope to announce the answer i have for this soon, but it will be 
by necessity a high latency process.

> Come on, friends, you've cracked harder nuts. Please :-)

Indeed, the next move is Walter's, if he chooses to not make it, 
so be it.