On Thursday, 25 September 2014 at 13:56:20 UTC, Andrei
Alexandrescu wrote:
On 9/25/14, 4:30 AM, Joakim wrote:
I'm sorry but it's ridiculous for you two co-BDFLs not to put
these new priorities or pre-approved features (perhaps even a
list of features you'd automatically reject) in a list on the
wiki and maintain it yourselves. It's the least you can do
considering the veto power you have.
That's sensible. We have the "preapproved" tag at
http://issues.dlang.org exactly for that kind of stuff. (I
should note, however, that sometimes it backfires - I've added
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13517 with preapproved
knowing it's sensible and entirely noncontroversial and got
unexpected pushback for it.)
That's not enough. While it's nice that a "preapproved" tag is
being used on bugzilla, most of those issues are too low-level
and an obscure bugzilla tag hardly fits the bill, particularly
when most D users have never seen the D bugzilla let alone use
it. It needs to be a page on the wiki or the main site, which
you or any user can link to anytime people want to know the plan.
I gave a specific example with dfix, yet to get an answer on
that. Brian may have marked his DIP 65 as rejected a couple
months back, but that still doesn't answer the broader question
of using a dfix tool for other cleanup.
You have talked about making D development more professional.
It's not very professional not to have some sort of public plan
of where you want the language to go. All I'm asking for is a
public list of preapproved and maybe rejected features that the
two of you maintain. Dfix might be on the preapproved list, ARC
might be on the rejected. ;) You could also outline broad
priorities like C++ support or GC improvement on such a webpage.
