Walter Bright wrote:
I also fail to understand this perception that D1 is abandoned. Every month an update is released for it that fixes a load of problems. D1 has led the way in ports to other platforms.
Because this news group's name is not D2. Folks come here, and see no mention of D1 for weeks. (Other than people whining about "no support, D1 abandoned", etc.) All they see is (to a D newcomer, anyway) incomprehensible ruminations on esoterics. But they believe this is /the thing/, since nobody warned them that this is (in reality) a future versions newsgroup.
From a (go ahead, call it "shrewd" and "marketing liar", I won't mind) perspective, _the_ newsgroup should be called D and it should contain D1 discussions. And then there should be a less conspicuous NG called "future releases discussions", which would be D2.
This change looks too trivial to make a difference, but that's exactly why I have to bring it up. (Why do you think M$ pays mega$ for some consultancy to invent a name for the next Windows version? It's the subconscious things in customers' brains they f**k with. And they're doing a good job at it.) Old D guys are too used to the current naming to appreciate the difference.
What isn't being done with D1 is adding a boatload of new features - because that would destroy any pretense of it being a stable release.
That's as it should be (given our limited resources).
