There's recently been a couple of notable threads that I recall over Tango, which have been entirely non-constructive, and revolved almost entirely around small details such as module naming conventions.  It's like there's some kind of fear and loathing seething under the surface. I'm wondering whether it's because Tango is not generally discussed in the ng at all. I mean, it is developed and maintained completely /outside/ of this ng environment. Is there some basis for this notion?

Kris wrote:
> There's recently been a couple of notable threads that I recall over Tango, which have been entirely non-constructive, and revolved almost entirely around small details such as module naming conventions.  It's like there's some kind of fear and loathing seething under the surface. I'm wondering whether it's because Tango is not generally discussed in the ng at all. I mean, it is developed and maintained completely /outside/ of this ng environment. Is there some basis for this notion? 

People are simply opinionated. Programmers especially so.

~ Clay

Reply to kris,

> There's recently been a couple of notable threads that I recall over
> Tango, which have been entirely non-constructive, and revolved almost
> entirely around small details such as module naming conventions.  It's
> like there's some kind of fear and loathing seething under the
> surface. I'm wondering whether it's because Tango is not generally
> discussed in the ng at all. I mean, it is developed and maintained
> completely /outside/ of this ng environment. Is there some basis for
> this notion?
> 

digitalmars.d.tango ????

Clay Smith wrote:
> Kris wrote:
>> There's recently been a couple of notable threads that I recall over Tango, which have been entirely non-constructive, and revolved almost entirely around small details such as module naming conventions.  It's like there's some kind of fear and loathing seething under the surface. I'm wondering whether it's because Tango is not generally discussed in the ng at all. I mean, it is developed and maintained completely /outside/ of this ng environment. Is there some basis for this notion? 
> 
> People are simply opinionated. Programmers especially so.

I disagree. ;-)

Sean

BCS wrote:
> digitalmars.d.tango ????

++votes, splendid idea, old chap!
As the community grows larger, it would be good
to spread the communication over more channels.

regards, frank

Kris wrote:
> There's recently been a couple of notable threads that I recall over Tango, which have been entirely non-constructive, and revolved almost entirely around small details such as module naming conventions.  It's like there's some kind of fear and loathing seething under the surface. I'm wondering whether it's because Tango is not generally discussed in the ng at all. I mean, it is developed and maintained completely /outside/ of this ng environment. Is there some basis for this notion? 
> 
> 

To me, it seems that both D and Tango are developed with a similar air of secrecy, widly discussed by those that are interested in them, both represented by their respective authors, but the process of decision making vieled and mysterious.

Occasionally there are announcements of a new version, even more occasionaly hints of new features upcoming, but no insight into the process that has built them.

Most are well recieved, and we all appreciate the effort that both parties put in to their work, but...

I cannot recall a single occasion wen Walter has dismissed an issue that was raised regarding the way that D works, he either welcomes the comments, offers constuctive counter arguments, or stays frustratingly quiet and mysterious.

Genuine enquiries about why Tango is like it is seem always to be met with the same few responces, "come to IRC/Our Forum", "well, you have a choice", dismissal of the issue as trivial and sometimes what seem to be personal remarks that have no baring on the issue.

When the feedback that people receive on the news groups is so blunt and hostile, are you really surprised that people are reluctant to come to your stomping grounds?

I can't help feeling some times that Tango's detractors are being bullied, and having now been on IRC with you I know that is not the case.

The face that you tend to show on the NG is not the one that I saw last night/this morning, but even this post seems to have a bullying tone to it.

It is obvious that the Tango developers all get along, and I can sense that many of them have a similar trait to their personality, that of finding it dificult to empathise with others, you do not have to accept or even understand someone else's concerns before you can acknowlege them.

The threads that involve Tango do tend to become drawn out, and the hostility is not entirely one sided, but the only reason that the are, as you say, non-constructive, is because there seems to be a reluctance to even look at issues from the other side's point of view.

The vast majority of Tango threads do not become debates because the Tango team seem unwilling even to acknowledge that the NG is a place where people are entitled to have a POV regarding Tango.

There are exceptions, but sadly, to my memory at least they are rare.

With a name like Tango you should have a slogan like "come dance with us", but it seems more like "wanna fight?" at the moment.

A...

Alix Pexton wrote:
> Kris wrote:
>> There's recently been a couple of notable threads that I recall over Tango, which have been entirely non-constructive, and revolved almost entirely around small details such as module naming conventions.  It's like there's some kind of fear and loathing seething under the surface. I'm wondering whether it's because Tango is not generally discussed in the ng at all. I mean, it is developed and maintained completely /outside/ of this ng environment. Is there some basis for this notion?
> 
> To me, it seems that both D and Tango are developed with a similar air of secrecy, widly discussed by those that are interested in them, both represented by their respective authors, but the process of decision making vieled and mysterious.
> 
> Occasionally there are announcements of a new version, even more occasionaly hints of new features upcoming, but no insight into the process that has built them.

I can see how some people may feel this way.  However, the bulk of discussion actually takes place on #d.tango, and in many cases is driven by user issues with the library.

> Genuine enquiries about why Tango is like it is seem always to be met with the same few responces, "come to IRC/Our Forum", "well, you have a choice", dismissal of the issue as trivial and sometimes what seem to be personal remarks that have no baring on the issue.

For the "come to irc/our forum" issue, I think the goal there is simply to be able to discuss the issue in a more natural manner in the former case, and so as not to forget about it in the latter case.  Kris, Lars, or I could enter tickets ourselves for issues described here, but often we don't understand the request well enough provide sufficient detail. That, and we're all somewhat overworked.

> The threads that involve Tango do tend to become drawn out, and the hostility is not entirely one sided, but the only reason that the are, as you say, non-constructive, is because there seems to be a reluctance to even look at issues from the other side's point of view.

I tend to avoid arguments on this newsgroup.  If that makes me seem unresponsive, I apologize.


Sean

Sean Kelly wrote:
> Alix Pexton wrote:
>> Kris wrote:
>>> There's recently been a couple of notable threads that I recall over Tango, which have been entirely non-constructive, and revolved almost entirely around small details such as module naming conventions.  It's like there's some kind of fear and loathing seething under the surface. I'm wondering whether it's because Tango is not generally discussed in the ng at all. I mean, it is developed and maintained completely /outside/ of this ng environment. Is there some basis for this notion?
>>
>> To me, it seems that both D and Tango are developed with a similar air of secrecy, widly discussed by those that are interested in them, both represented by their respective authors, but the process of decision making vieled and mysterious.
>>
>> Occasionally there are announcements of a new version, even more occasionaly hints of new features upcoming, but no insight into the process that has built them.
> 
> I can see how some people may feel this way.  However, the bulk of discussion actually takes place on #d.tango, and in many cases is driven by user issues with the library.
> 
>> Genuine enquiries about why Tango is like it is seem always to be met with the same few responces, "come to IRC/Our Forum", "well, you have a choice", dismissal of the issue as trivial and sometimes what seem to be personal remarks that have no baring on the issue.
> 
> For the "come to irc/our forum" issue, I think the goal there is simply to be able to discuss the issue in a more natural manner in the former case, and so as not to forget about it in the latter case.  Kris, Lars, or I could enter tickets ourselves for issues described here, but often we don't understand the request well enough provide sufficient detail. That, and we're all somewhat overworked.
> 
>> The threads that involve Tango do tend to become drawn out, and the hostility is not entirely one sided, but the only reason that the are, as you say, non-constructive, is because there seems to be a reluctance to even look at issues from the other side's point of view.
> 
> I tend to avoid arguments on this newsgroup.  If that makes me seem unresponsive, I apologize.
> 
> 
> Sean

I prefer to be able to take my time and consider how I word my opinions and views very carefully, this does not lend itself well to IRC. When one stops to think there, oneis iften harried and poked...

I prefer unresponsive to argument, but I prefer debate to unresponsive, I don't think this is a uncommon or unusual view.

A...

I think it's a bad idea. If you really want to talk tango on these newsgroups, what is keeping you from it ?

Alix Pexton Wrote:

> Kris wrote:
> > There's recently been a couple of notable threads that I recall over Tango, which have been entirely non-constructive, and revolved almost entirely around small details such as module naming conventions.  It's like there's some kind of fear and loathing seething under the surface. I'm wondering whether it's because Tango is not generally discussed in the ng at all. I mean, it is developed and maintained completely /outside/ of this ng environment. Is there some basis for this notion?
> > 
> > 
> 
> To me, it seems that both D and Tango are developed with a similar air of secrecy, widly discussed by those that are interested in them, both represented by their respective authors, but the process of decision making vieled and mysterious.
>
veiled ;) but agreed. It would be nice to know more about what's happening on the const front for example. even if the forum were read only.

> Occasionally there are announcements of a new version, even more occasionaly hints of new features upcoming, but no insight into the process that has built them.
> 
> Most are well recieved, and we all appreciate the effort that both parties put in to their work, but...
> 
> I cannot recall a single occasion wen Walter has dismissed an issue that was raised regarding the way that D works, he either welcomes the comments, offers constuctive counter arguments, or stays frustratingly quiet and mysterious.
> 
> Genuine enquiries about why Tango is like it is seem always to be met with the same few responces, "come to IRC/Our Forum", "well, you have a choice", dismissal of the issue as trivial and sometimes what seem to be personal remarks that have no baring on the issue.
> 
I think one thing explains a significant fraction of the difference. Walter probably reads almost every post here but unless he has a very specific question or point to make he keeps quiet and lets everyone else duke it out. The signal to noise ratio is much higher that way. It also lends him an aura of respect aside from being the language designer. The signal to noise ratio here has got beyond a joke. I can see why IRC would be preferred by people who like to respond to absolutely every query and get to the bottom of things quickly but on this kind of interface a more measured approach is usually better. I'm being a bit of a hypocrite here as I stick my oar in way too much but I think my point still stands.

Regards,

Bruce.