The process described in the linked article could be a good thing for D

[forkit]

On Wednesday, 25 May 2022 at 03:44:08 UTC, max haughton wrote:
> ...
> I'm saying we have enough humans to do stuff we are just not 
> good at keep them pointing at the right stuff, for reasons 
> similar to those described in the linked article.

You need better managers then.

> In a project like D naively aiming to manage people will just 
> piss people off, we need to make progress observable and make 
> it obvious where actually needs work and what other people are 
> trying to do. Being able to measure some notion of progress, 
> even if fuzzy, is good way of getting more of that thing: ...

This is why you need managers. Not to 'manage people', but to 
manage these issues.

> Managing programmers is a full time job even if you're paying 
> them to work for you.

One does not manage programmers ;-)

>
> This concept has an added benefit in allowing people new to 
> contributing to find something to do without having to actively 
> seek out people they may not know exist yet. Similarly we have 
> no data on whether people try and fail to contribute, get 
> stuck, etc: sticking a little survey somewhere is better than 
> nothing.

Again, this is why you need someone managing this. It won't 
happen otherwise.

Try asking the most important questions first.

Who is managing this repository, and that repository?

At the moment, I don't know. Do you? Is it Walter? Does he do it 
all?

I cannot currently go to a manager and say, hey, I think these 
areas need to be improved, and here are some ideas on how it 
might be done.

Just having the idea and spraying it around the NG won't make 
much difference to anything.

If D wants to set itself up for a new phase, it will need good 
managers, not just good programmers.