On Wednesday, 11 March 2015 at 06:56:27 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> On 3/10/15 11:52 PM, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
>> I can only urge you to consult with someone deeply involved with Vibe
>> (e.g. Sonke), as well as someone who uses Vibe and Dub heavily in
>> production, before forcing a decision.
>
> Sönke was up for it last time we communicated.

Question, was he merely OK with it or did he agree that this is genuinely a good idea?

On 3/11/15 1:10 AM, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
> On Wednesday, 11 March 2015 at 06:56:27 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> On 3/10/15 11:52 PM, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
>>> I can only urge you to consult with someone deeply involved with Vibe
>>> (e.g. Sonke), as well as someone who uses Vibe and Dub heavily in
>>> production, before forcing a decision.
>>
>> Sönke was up for it last time we communicated.
>
> Question, was he merely OK with it or did he agree that this is
> genuinely a good idea?

The latter, but I'll let him spek for himself. -- Andrei

On 11/03/2015 9:00 p.m., Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
> On Wednesday, 11 March 2015 at 07:32:48 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> It doesn't seem so to me. You find easy weaknesses in my vision and
>> pump on them instead of working on making it stronger. That's the easy
>> "but that business won't work, and here are the reasons why" approach.
>> The harder part is finding ways to make it work by overcoming its
>> weaknesses.
>
> Here is a counter-proposal:
>
> 1. Add Dub to D.
>
> 2. Add a "web development" link in the sidebar, which simply links to
> vibed.org.
>
> 3. Add an example on the front page on how to create a simple web
> server. It needs to list only main.d and package.json, and the dub
> command line to build it. A package.json will be needed for non-trivial
> things anyway, so might as well get that out of the way anyway.
>
> 4. Unite the Vibe.d forum with forum.dlang.org. I should be able to do
> this by making forum.dlang.org connect to it via NNTP.
>
> I think this will achieve much of your goal without the drawbacks.

I would like to add putting focus on getting libasync[0] phobos ready instead of the vibe.d direction.

It might be a lot younger, but it is also have a lot smaller scope.

Perhaps even a rewrite of std.socket to use it?

It is a lot of work, but its probably a more manageable unit of work in the short term.

[0] https://github.com/etcimon/libasync

On Wednesday, 11 March 2015 at 08:57:14 UTC, Rikki Cattermole wrote:
> On 11/03/2015 9:00 p.m., Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
>> On Wednesday, 11 March 2015 at 07:32:48 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>>> It doesn't seem so to me. You find easy weaknesses in my vision and
>>> pump on them instead of working on making it stronger. That's the easy
>>> "but that business won't work, and here are the reasons why" approach.
>>> The harder part is finding ways to make it work by overcoming its
>>> weaknesses.
>>
>> Here is a counter-proposal:
>>
>> 1. Add Dub to D.
>>
>> 2. Add a "web development" link in the sidebar, which simply links to
>> vibed.org.
>>
>> 3. Add an example on the front page on how to create a simple web
>> server. It needs to list only main.d and package.json, and the dub
>> command line to build it. A package.json will be needed for non-trivial
>> things anyway, so might as well get that out of the way anyway.
>>
>> 4. Unite the Vibe.d forum with forum.dlang.org. I should be able to do
>> this by making forum.dlang.org connect to it via NNTP.
>>
>> I think this will achieve much of your goal without the drawbacks.
>
> I would like to add putting focus on getting libasync[0] phobos ready instead of the vibe.d direction.
>
> It might be a lot younger, but it is also have a lot smaller scope.
>
> Perhaps even a rewrite of std.socket to use it?
>
> It is a lot of work, but its probably a more manageable unit of work in the short term.
>
> [0] https://github.com/etcimon/libasync


+100000!!!

and yes, we are using vibe.d in production, but libasync also.
---
Paolo

On Tuesday, 10 March 2015 at 22:41:32 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> 3. As I articulated in the vision document, we aim at making vibe.d an integral part of the D distribution. That's more than a packaging issue: (a) vibe.d must follow the same release process, perhaps even same version numbering; (b) acceptance of a release is contingent upon vibe.d working. I think we need to secure Sönke approval of DIP75.
>
>
> Andrei

Don't special-case vibe.d. Dub is the key to the ecosystem. Once you have dub, vibe.d comes for free, even if you don't want to use dub for your project.

Guarantees of operation with particular compiler versions is something for vibe.d versioning, which in turn is the job of dub to manage.

Not breaking vibe.d with dmd/phobos regressions needs the auto-tester, not release bundling.

On 11/03/2015 11:04 p.m., Paolo Invernizzi wrote:
> On Wednesday, 11 March 2015 at 08:57:14 UTC, Rikki Cattermole wrote:
>> On 11/03/2015 9:00 p.m., Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, 11 March 2015 at 07:32:48 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>>>> It doesn't seem so to me. You find easy weaknesses in my vision and
>>>> pump on them instead of working on making it stronger. That's the easy
>>>> "but that business won't work, and here are the reasons why" approach.
>>>> The harder part is finding ways to make it work by overcoming its
>>>> weaknesses.
>>>
>>> Here is a counter-proposal:
>>>
>>> 1. Add Dub to D.
>>>
>>> 2. Add a "web development" link in the sidebar, which simply links to
>>> vibed.org.
>>>
>>> 3. Add an example on the front page on how to create a simple web
>>> server. It needs to list only main.d and package.json, and the dub
>>> command line to build it. A package.json will be needed for non-trivial
>>> things anyway, so might as well get that out of the way anyway.
>>>
>>> 4. Unite the Vibe.d forum with forum.dlang.org. I should be able to do
>>> this by making forum.dlang.org connect to it via NNTP.
>>>
>>> I think this will achieve much of your goal without the drawbacks.
>>
>> I would like to add putting focus on getting libasync[0] phobos ready
>> instead of the vibe.d direction.
>>
>> It might be a lot younger, but it is also have a lot smaller scope.
>>
>> Perhaps even a rewrite of std.socket to use it?
>>
>> It is a lot of work, but its probably a more manageable unit of work
>> in the short term.
>>
>> [0] https://github.com/etcimon/libasync
>
>
> +100000!!!
>
> and yes, we are using vibe.d in production, but libasync also.
> ---
> Paolo

IMO it makes more sense then vibe.d itself does. Yes vibe.d is what end developers will use. But libasync is doing a lot of the lower level work needed to make vibe.d useful.

If we can get the low level parts decent, vibe.d will benefit greatly from it.

On 2015-03-11 08:47, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:

> If you want to increase Vibe's visibility, adding a few links to
> dlang.org will serve this goal much better.

I agree. Bundle Dub and make vibe.d clearly visible on dlang.org.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg

On 2015-03-11 08:47, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
> On Wednesday, 11 March 2015 at 07:32:48 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> On 3/11/15 12:19 AM, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:

>>> What happens if a regression occurs in Vibe just before a D release? Do
>>> we block the release for the sake of Vibe?
>>
>> Yes.
>
> Are you really OK with this? Is everyone OK with this?
>
> Everyone who does not use Vibe almost certainly is not going to be OK
> with this.

I like the semantic version scheme that Dub uses (including vibe.d). I have never liked the way D is released. Both big new features and small bug fixes in the same release.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg

On 3/11/15 1:00 AM, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
> On Wednesday, 11 March 2015 at 07:32:48 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> It doesn't seem so to me. You find easy weaknesses in my vision and
>> pump on them instead of working on making it stronger. That's the easy
>> "but that business won't work, and here are the reasons why" approach.
>> The harder part is finding ways to make it work by overcoming its
>> weaknesses.
>
> Here is a counter-proposal:
>
> 1. Add Dub to D.
>
> 2. Add a "web development" link in the sidebar, which simply links to
> vibed.org.
>
> 3. Add an example on the front page on how to create a simple web
> server. It needs to list only main.d and package.json, and the dub
> command line to build it. A package.json will be needed for non-trivial
> things anyway, so might as well get that out of the way anyway.
>
> 4. Unite the Vibe.d forum with forum.dlang.org. I should be able to do
> this by making forum.dlang.org connect to it via NNTP.
>
> I think this will achieve much of your goal without the drawbacks.

These are good steps to take. If after taking them we're in a good place, we can stop there. -- Andrei

On 3/11/15 3:53 AM, John Colvin wrote:
> On Tuesday, 10 March 2015 at 22:41:32 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> 3. As I articulated in the vision document, we aim at making vibe.d an
>> integral part of the D distribution. That's more than a packaging
>> issue: (a) vibe.d must follow the same release process, perhaps even
>> same version numbering; (b) acceptance of a release is contingent upon
>> vibe.d working. I think we need to secure Sönke approval of DIP75.
>>
>>
>> Andrei
>
> Don't special-case vibe.d. Dub is the key to the ecosystem.

Dub is great. Vibe is great. We need to include both. -- Andrei