On Thursday, 19 October 2017 at 21:18:43 UTC, Rion wrote:
> On Thursday, 19 October 2017 at 18:10:04 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
>> Told by whom?
>
> The responses here seem to be a good indicator that he is wasting his time. The past responses in similar topics.
>
>> Even Andrei or Walter can be convinced over time, if one is persistent enough. :-D  There have been cases of this in the past.
>> Of course, this presumes that one cares about the issue enough to persist in the face of opposition, which may or may not be the case here.
>
> You mean like those where people are told, if you write a proposal it may get accepted. Then the author does all the work, writes the code changes, gets pushed to make more changes, gets ignored over time and loses interest, only for year later it showing up again and the process repeats? And nothing gets done to the point the author simply moved on to other languages. Yes, those have been very successful ( sarcasm ) in persuading people to put time into D development.
>
> D has a bad track record with implementations of proposals, even when the actual code has been written. There has always been a standard: Walter writes it, its going to get accepted with a high ratio in one form or another. Somebody who is not a core member, well ...
>
> But this is my last response on this. Moving on to a different language because from my point of view, D will not be very open / marketing focused to non C++ developers. And some people seem very willing to push people there buttons when topics like this come up. As we see in this topic. I regret that the actions of few constantly ruin the work of others ( to bring people in ). What seems to be a recurring theme.
>
> But let bygones be bygones. Good fortune to you all.

I have been rung out several times in the D, Python and C++ communities trying to get various proposals up over the yrs. I dare not count the hours that have gone into each and I have to say that D is the most forgiving and helpful community when it comes to feedback and help.

For me the proposal process, i.e. drafting, prototype implementation etc., is the best personal learning and development experience money can't buy and the acceptance of a proposal is second to this. That is what I get out of submitting proposals.

bye,
lobo

On Thursday, 19 October 2017 at 21:18:43 UTC, Rion wrote:
> But this is my last response on this. Moving on to a different language because from my point of view, D will not be very open / marketing focused to non C++ developers. And some people seem very willing to push people there buttons when topics like this come up. As we see in this topic. I regret that the actions of few constantly ruin the work of others ( to bring people in ). What seems to be a recurring theme.

Can I suggest, that you adjust your sails too ;-)

The only constant, is that people are always inclined to submit new ideas (especially true for newbies), good or bad, that sit in queues waiting for approval...and eventually lose their motivation and go elsewhere....

Sadly, this is the curse of volunteer based open source development.

That's why newbies (and not so newbies), coming in with new ideas, often get demotivated. It does *not* ever mean the idea is not good, or that people would not like to see it come about. It is usually because volunteers simply are *already* very focused on higher priorities that *already* exist, and almost certainly, there are *already* too many of those. Each new idea, or enhancement request, just adds to the existing list...making it grower longer and longer...and guess how people start to feel when that happens...and I don't just mean the people adding to that list, but the people working on that list. So think of them too.

That's why I really feel that newbies need to learn *first*, how to adjust their sails to the wind. That is the first lesson.

The wind does it's own thing...you need adjust to it, not it to you.

Have you looked at this lately? https://dlang.org/bugstats.html

Look at the number of open enhancement requests. Then look at the number of critical and major requests - priority matters!

So picking your battles, is really more about adjusting your focus to the stuff that needs to get done first. If you have a new idea, there's a good chance it won't get done unless you do it. And I've explained the reasons for that, already.

I'm sure everyone likes the idea of making D more welcoming to new users...especially those that expect an all encompassing solution, delivered to them on a silver platter. But current volunteers are just not focused on that..they are focused on something else. What is needed, is new volunteers, who *can* focus on just that - rather than telling others to focus on that.

So I say, don't submit a request...go do it. Then tell others about it. If your work has merit, and is important and useful to enough people, at the time, then it will be recognised. If not, tough.

Just look at all the stuff that 'volunteers' have done, are doing, and are still yet to get around to doing. It's pretty amazing! Nobody should be undermining their motivations, or suggest they aren't welcoming of new ideas.

Have a listen to Walter (a compiler programmer), explaining (just some of) the challenges of trying to run an open source project:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UGcKojMF5ps

Does any one of us really think, that we can do it better ??

Motivation is really important in life. I get it. Motivation is key for me too.

But if your sails are not adjusted to the wind, then you're not going to get very far.

btw... before turning away from D, remember, that "Once a new technology starts rolling, if you're not part of the steamroller, ..[you might end up being].. part of the road."

;-)

On Thursday, 19 October 2017 at 21:18:43 UTC, Rion wrote:
> D has a bad track record with implementations of proposals, even when the actual code has been written. There has always been a standard: Walter writes it, its going to get accepted with a high ratio in one form or another. Somebody who is not a core member, well ...

I don't think this sort of complaints are particular to D. I see similar rants in Scala's google group from time to time, e.g. [1].

[1] https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/scala-internals/r2GnzCFc3TY

On Friday, 20 October 2017 at 16:13:06 UTC, Mark wrote:
> I don't think this sort of complaints are particular to D. I see similar rants in Scala's google group from time to time,

These 'predictable patterns' (the emergence of similar attitudes, for example) can also be expressed and understood mathematically....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_theory

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nash_equilibrium

The real challenge (and ultimate goal) for any  open-source project (especially a volunteer based one), is finding equilibria.

Open source projects are after all, nothing more, that a co-operative game.

Actually, I think perhaps the whole universe, is just one big co-operative game ;-)

From this perspective, everything can be accounted for.

On Saturday, 21 October 2017 at 01:45:40 UTC, codephantom wrote:
> The real challenge (and ultimate goal) for any  open-source project (especially a volunteer based one), is finding equilibria.

Honestly, I do not believe that an open-source project, beyond a certain scale, can sustain itself without a consistent income stream.

On Saturday, 21 October 2017 at 09:51:41 UTC, Mark wrote:
> Honestly, I do not believe that an open-source project, beyond a certain scale, can sustain itself without a consistent income stream.

It is possible, but you need a very modular architecture. The main problem for large open source projects is restructuring/refactoring, which can kill the project.

One example of large open source volunteer based projects are MUDs, but they tend to be very modular in nature.

On Saturday, 21 October 2017 at 09:51:41 UTC, Mark wrote:
> On Saturday, 21 October 2017 at 01:45:40 UTC, codephantom wrote:
>> The real challenge (and ultimate goal) for any  open-source project (especially a volunteer based one), is finding equilibria.
>
> Honestly, I do not believe that an open-source project, beyond a certain scale, can sustain itself without a consistent income stream.

The Foundation has gone from zero to something.  That's the hardest part.  Over time I'm sure its revenue will grow.