The D AGM

[Johan Coder]

Hello D community,


I use D professionally from some months back.  Posting as 
anonymous to avoid opening debates at work.  I come from a 
Scala-Java-Python background and in many ways D is a breathe of 
fresh air.  True in others is not which is expected.  Also 
started following the github stream of work because we are 
interested in a few bugfixes in language-and phobos-space.  Not 
much on forums but have been active in other languages similar 
forums and on occasions in their official meetups.

I looked at the conference and AGM on video because it is related 
to my day job.  I have had hopes about the AGM but it was a bit 
disappointing due to a few things.  Feed back inspired from 
similar meetings I saw:

- Formalism is very important and it is great that Walter and 
Andrei insist on it.  Python PEP are very informal and the 
process is argumentative.  Java and Scala are better and should 
give inspiration.

- The DIPS discussion was too long.  DIP 1000 needs more 
documentation but that should be one minute decision.  DIP 1015 
is not very important, why discuss it again? All languages have 
things like this and I like D bool more than verbose Java 
boolean.  But it does not matter anyway!  DIP 1016 was the 
interesting but was not discussed.  No discussion about the DIPS 
pipeline which is the most important!

- The vision part was also too long and too few clear conclusion. 
  A lot of important things not discussed.

- Form of meeting was.....  much to be improved.  Anyone could 
hold the microphone for any time and say whatever.  No filter and 
honest some people said too little in too much (not sure how to 
express).  Many words with little content.  The person at 
https://youtu.be/cpTAtiboIDs?t=4462 loves to hear himself.  There 
should be a limit.  In such meetings the moderator needs to 
control it, and they did a poor job.

- Meeting should not be with time limit.  All items must be 
discussed and it ends when topics end.  Why only two hours for so 
many items?

- Items came in random order.  If there is a time limit most 
important topics must come first.  Most meeting was on minor 
things!

- Speaking of meeting moderator, who was that? Mike, Ethan or 
Nick? The moderator/s did a bad job at making the meeting work.  
One problem is Nick was not organized and difficult to understand 
even.  More complicated is I don't understand Nicks role.  Was he 
chosen by the D foundation?  If so I suggest he is replaced for 
next year.  If not I did not see a process of election by the 
community.  Does it means he appointed himself?  Anyone can do 
that by collecting a random list of popular topics and saying he 
will hold an AGM?  That would be an even bigger problem.

This is my list.  It is in random order too!  Most important:  
make time for all topics.  Discuss important topics first.  
Moderation should limit time with the microphone and move the 
meeting forward such that everything is discussed.