On 11/30/2012 09:08 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> On 11/30/12 4:49 AM, 1100110 wrote:
>> Andrei's support is also necessary, IIRC he is one of main person behind
>> phobos. A stable version of D is not useful without a stable version of
>> phobos and druntime to go with it.
>
> I'm very supportive of a serious, meaningful initiative.
>
> My perception is that we're having growing pains - our process is
> lagging behind the participation in the project and the attention it
> receives. If Walter and I do not acknowledge that in time and act
> swiftly on it, we're heading toward a crisis in the community much, much
> larger and dangerous than the D1/D2 schism.
>
>
> Andrei

Andrei, How would you organize this?

If the process is lagging behind, what can be done to get it up-to-speed?

On 3 December 2012 02:26, 1100110 <0b1100110@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 11/30/2012 09:08 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>>
>> On 11/30/12 4:49 AM, 1100110 wrote:
>>>
>>> Andrei's support is also necessary, IIRC he is one of main person behind phobos. A stable version of D is not useful without a stable version of phobos and druntime to go with it.
>>
>>
>> I'm very supportive of a serious, meaningful initiative.
>>
>> My perception is that we're having growing pains - our process is lagging behind the participation in the project and the attention it receives. If Walter and I do not acknowledge that in time and act swiftly on it, we're heading toward a crisis in the community much, much larger and dangerous than the D1/D2 schism.
>>
>>
>> Andrei
>
>
> Andrei, How would you organize this?
>
> If the process is lagging behind, what can be done to get it up-to-speed?

Isn't lagging behind the point of stable? ;-)


-- 
Iain Buclaw

*(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0';