The highlights:

> Our goal for Go 2 is to fix the most significant ways Go fails to scale.

> Go 2 must bring along all those developers. We must ask them to unlearn old habits and learn new ones only when the reward is great.

> Go 2 must also bring along all the existing Go 1 source code. We must not split the Go ecosystem. Mixed programs, in which packages written in Go 2 import packages written in Go 1 and vice versa, must work effortlessly during a transition period of multiple years. We'll have to figure out exactly how to do that; automated tooling like go fix will certainly play a part.

> Today, what we need most is experience reports. Please tell us how Go is working for you, and more importantly not working for you. Write a blog post, include real examples, concrete detail, and real experience. And link it on our wiki page. That's how we'll start talking about what we, the Go community, might want to change about Go.

I believe that if we ever want to see D3, we should start a similar process and collect real world feedback about things that are annoying on a daily basis.
There have been many threads about "I want to have feature X" in D and of course legendary threads like the one about removing auto-decoding, but the aim of this discussion is to identify things that bother you frequently or prevent you from using D on a wider scale.
Please see Russ's post for good examples. Blog posts or reports on the wiki are very welcome.

The monotonic clock example is rather abysmal: they were deaf to predictions and when it broke half of the internet, they jammed in a hack.

On Wednesday, 6 September 2017 at 14:42:20 UTC, dimaria wrote:
> The highlights:
>
>> Our goal for Go 2 is to fix the most significant ways Go fails to scale.
>
>> Go 2 must bring along all those developers. We must ask them to unlearn old habits and learn new ones only when the reward is great.
>
>> Go 2 must also bring along all the existing Go 1 source code. We must not split the Go ecosystem. Mixed programs, in which packages written in Go 2 import packages written in Go 1 and vice versa, must work effortlessly during a transition period of multiple years. We'll have to figure out exactly how to do that; automated tooling like go fix will certainly play a part.
>
>> Today, what we need most is experience reports. Please tell us how Go is working for you, and more importantly not working for you. Write a blog post, include real examples, concrete detail, and real experience. And link it on our wiki page. That's how we'll start talking about what we, the Go community, might want to change about Go.
>
> I believe that if we ever want to see D3, we should start a similar process and collect real world feedback about things that are annoying on a daily basis.
> There have been many threads about "I want to have feature X" in D and of course legendary threads like the one about removing auto-decoding, but the aim of this discussion is to identify things that bother you frequently or prevent you from using D on a wider scale.
> Please see Russ's post for good examples. Blog posts or reports on the wiki are very welcome.

I believe the core team is focused on D2 and isn't interested in entertaining thoughts about yet another breaking fork, especially after what happened the last time around.  As such, listing all such feedback will only be useful if you want to try and fix stuff in D2, it will most likely not lead to a D3 anytime soon.

Given D's current upward trajectory, they're probably right about maintaining that and pushing D3 for later:

http://erdani.com/d/downloads.daily.png

On Wednesday, 6 September 2017 at 14:42:20 UTC, dimaria wrote:
> The highlights:
>
>> Our goal for Go 2 is to fix the most significant ways Go fails to scale.
>
>> Go 2 must bring along all those developers. We must ask them to unlearn old habits and learn new ones only when the reward is great.
>
>> Go 2 must also bring along all the existing Go 1 source code. We must not split the Go ecosystem. Mixed programs, in which packages written in Go 2 import packages written in Go 1 and vice versa, must work effortlessly during a transition period of multiple years. We'll have to figure out exactly how to do that; automated tooling like go fix will certainly play a part.
>
>> Today, what we need most is experience reports. Please tell us how Go is working for you, and more importantly not working for you. Write a blog post, include real examples, concrete detail, and real experience. And link it on our wiki page. That's how we'll start talking about what we, the Go community, might want to change about Go.


I think D is already following those principles as it improves on D2's bugs and features. I think this is the right approach for D at this time. But re-evaluating what D3 should mean every couple years makes sense but will always have the thought that it is another D1/D2 split.

On Wednesday, 6 September 2017 at 14:42:20 UTC, dimaria wrote:
> The highlights:
>
>> Our goal for Go 2 is to fix the most significant ways Go fails to scale.
>
>> Go 2 must bring along all those developers. We must ask them to unlearn old habits and learn new ones only when the reward is great.
>
>> Go 2 must also bring along all the existing Go 1 source code. We must not split the Go ecosystem. Mixed programs, in which packages written in Go 2 import packages written in Go 1 and vice versa, must work effortlessly during a transition period of multiple years. We'll have to figure out exactly how to do that; automated tooling like go fix will certainly play a part.
>
>> Today, what we need most is experience reports. Please tell us how Go is working for you, and more importantly not working for you. Write a blog post, include real examples, concrete detail, and real experience. And link it on our wiki page. That's how we'll start talking about what we, the Go community, might want to change about Go.
>
> I believe that if we ever want to see D3, we should start a similar process and collect real world feedback about things that are annoying on a daily basis.
> There have been many threads about "I want to have feature X" in D and of course legendary threads like the one about removing auto-decoding, but the aim of this discussion is to identify things that bother you frequently or prevent you from using D on a wider scale.
> Please see Russ's post for good examples. Blog posts or reports on the wiki are very welcome.

I don't think a D2/D3 split is needed, just impose the fixes on the language step by step, which is easy in our current position. Only thing needed is some patching of already existing code. D3 should only happen, when changes done to D2 will be harder to implement in the long-run, eg. widespread use of language functions (please, put DIP45 into effect, when it still won't break too much code!).