On 30.04.2010 15:46, lurker wrote: > So far I've been just lurking here, but these are my 5 cents. > > I think the library situation is terrible. It's not for the good of D. We > should just simple ditch Tango. It's D 1.0 only and always causing trouble. > We absolutely need support from professionals and enterprises. D is growing > fast. The need for attribution is just intolerable, we need brown tongue > attitude to lure in the big money. Would a professional use BSD? I agree > Boost has very high quality and they might not even notice/care if we "steal" > from them. > > I totally agree with the convincing arguments I found from the mailing list: > > "Now I'm glad I never looked at Tango. I don't empathize with the > Tango fellows keeping their precious locked because it's very difficult > to frame that action as having D's community interest at heart. To be > frank their whole motivation looks petty and political to the extreme, > particularly because it's not a rocket science library." > > "I think for practical reasons we should simply stay away from Tango. > We'd be wasting time otherwise. It's not like they discovered the cure > for cancer."
Would be nice if you'd actually refer to your parent post in, you know, _any_ way instead of rehashing the very arguments they debunked. Phobos1 is shit. The Tango devs know this, the Phobos devs know it. Anyone who denies it has never compared the Phobos and Tango sourcecode. Your "simple" solution is never gonna happen. You're not freaking Alexander the Great, cutting the Gordian Knot. The way D2 is going is the best solution for both sides, imho; but _anything_ that prevents Tango/Phobos interop in D2, or pushes away Tango devs, or pushes away Phobos devs - should be treated as a *severe* threat to the future of the language. We *absolutely need* to present a unified front in D2. We fucked this up once already; let's not repeat that experience. --feep
