[phobos] Community shout-out?

[Dmitry Olshansky]

On 14.11.2010 11:05, SHOO wrote:
> I think that it is important that we prioritize our to-do list.
Strongly agree. It's even better if it's public list so that all users 
aware of it.
>
> Therefore I think that firstly we should make a list. Next, it is 
> necessary for us to clarify the problem that each item has.
>
> I show following list the thing which I hit on:
> - std.stream, I/O (replace, enhance)
> - std.xml (replace?)
> - std.json (replace?)
> - std.datetime (replace, enhance)
> - scope/RAII (replace, enhance)
> - std.scoket / asio (replace)
> - std.event (enhance)
> - std.serialize (enhance)
> - documents (enhance)
> - std.process (enhance)
> - std.path, std.file (enhance)
> - pure (apply)
> - nothrow (apply)
> - @safe/@trusted/@system (apply)
> - shared (enhance, bug fix)
> - GC (enhance)
> - std.container (enhance)
> - opDollars (enhance, apply)
> - and some voted bugs (bug fix)
> (I only enumerate of the list at this stage, and omit the detailed 
> explanation.)
>
> Are there items else?
>
Also
- std.bind(deprecate,remove)
it's outdated, it's not working, it's functionality is superseded by 
closures/delegates,
and it's still on top in Phobos documentation ;)
> -- 
> 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
> _______________________________________________
> phobos mailing list
> phobos at puremagic.com
> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos