[phobos] Community shout-out?

[SHOO]

About a problem of std.xml.

I do not clearly understand what of this module is a problem. Is the 
main factor lack of the maintainer? Or the design concept? Performance? 
Bugs?

Please make problems clear.

Otherwise the action indicator that we should take next is not decided. 
(I think that this is what I can talk to other modules, too.)

--
SHOO

(2010/11/14 14:52), Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> We have several modules in Phobos which are supposedly going to be deprecated in
> favor of better implementations (std.stream, std.xml, std.json, etc). As I
> understand it, this is primarily because the code isn't being maintained, is
> poorly designed for D2 (possibly because it isn't range-centric or just hasn't
> been updated with D2-only features), and/or lacks a maintainer/champion. In
> addition to that, there's various types of functionality which should probably
> be in Phobos but haven't been done yet.
>
> The Phobos developers only have so much time on their hands, and some portion of
> this kind of work is going to need to be done by people who are not currently on
> the Phobos team. That, and we seem to be adopting the idea that the ideal
> situation is for each module to have a "champion" of sorts who is behind the
> module, working to fix bugs on it and make it better.
>
> So, I was wondering if what we should do is figure out what some of the modules
> are that we want in Phobos - and in particular the ones currently in Phobos
> which need to be overhauled - and then post on the main D list looking for
> people willing to take them on. We don't want to a flood of code that needs to be
> reviewed for inclusion in Phobos, but if we want to get a lot of this stuff done,
> we need more people working on it - particularly people who are really looking
> to focus on it and champion it.
>
> So, I'm suggesting that we identify the top priority module which aren't likely
> to be done by Phobos developers any time soon and see if we can get others in
> the D community to do them. In particular, it's a problem that we have several
> modules which we intend to replace. The longer that we wait, the more code that
> will be written using the old modules, and the more code which will break when
> they get replaced.
>
> - Jonathan M Davis