"Walter" <walter@digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:btntg9$303u$2@digitaldaemon.com...
>
> "Matthew" <matthew.hat@stlsoft.dot.org> wrote in message news:btnii9$2f79$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> > I think we'd need a well coordinated countdown on the D NG, so that
> everyone
> > who's inclined would not forget to add their vote.
>
> I'd like to wait until after SDWest, and 1.0 is released (early March).
That
> would give us our best shot.

Fine by me

"Mark T" <Mark_member@pathlink.com> wrote in message news:btntn2$30bf$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> Can someone setup a website where we could try a practice vote
(essentially to
> see how many potential yes votes we have), of course people could vote
more than
> once on a website.
>
> For the real vote we could recruit friends and neighbors.

I could rustle up a handful of people.

"J Anderson" <REMOVEanderson@badmama.com.au> wrote in message news:btnu23$30nq$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> Matthew wrote:
>
> >"Georg Wrede" <Georg_member@pathlink.com> wrote in message news:btnkm8$2imu$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> >
> >
> >>In article <btnii9$2f79$1@digitaldaemon.com>, Matthew says...
> >>
> >>
> >>>>J Anderson wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>Marco A wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>Would people be interested in creating a comp.lang.d usenet group to approximately correspond with the 1.0 release?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>Would it be a good idea to try a test vote right here? We could ask
> >>
> >>
> >everybody,
> >
> >
> >>including the people who don't usually write here, to cast a yes/no vote
> >>
> >>
> >for
> >
> >
> >>their contribution to the c.l newsgroup?
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Sure. Why not?
> >
> >But surely we're in for a 99+% response, aren't we?
> >
> >
> >
> We also need > 125 (factoring in JC's no vote estimate). So it'd be a good idea to see how many potential votes we'll get.

Good point. Let's do it.

"Matthew" <matthew.hat@stlsoft.dot.org> wrote in message news:btnum5$9t$1@digitaldaemon.com...
>
> "Walter" <walter@digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:btntg8$303u$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> >
> > "KTC" <me@here.com> wrote in message
> news:bti7kk$bp7$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> > > If you can't make it into the Big-8, then you can of course create it
> > > in Alt.
> > > But I would say having it inside the Big-8 would be a lot better in
> > > promoting the language to the programming community as a whole...
> >
> > I'm not too keen on the idea of an alt group. D belongs in comp.lang.d,
> and
> > if that doesn't happen, we should keep it here until it does happen.
>
> I won't be visiting alt.*.D.

Should rename "alt" to "purgatory" <g>.

"Walter" wrote...
>
> Should rename "alt" to "purgatory" <g>.
>

LOL. Don't worry, I was just saying that I could not that one should :-)

"Walter" wrote...
>
> I'd like to wait until after SDWest, and 1.0 is released (early
March). That
> would give us our best shot.
>

Sure, the whole process takes about 2-3 months anyway. You just decide when it is the best timing for submitting a formal proposal & then the PQ for the actual votes... The formal proposal need to be work on first anyway so we can do that in the mean time.

However this community try to promote it when the time comes (i.e. telling people how/when to vote etc.), just need to make sure there will be no violation of any of the "Guidelines for Big Eight Newsgroup Creation". Namely one of the most important being:

    "The explicit voting instructions in the CFV may not be
distributed, in whole or in part, to any forum, by anyone except the
votetaker. People wishing to vote should be referred to the CFV posted
in news.announce.newgroups or told to contact the votetaker for a
copy. Violations may result in invalidation of votes by the votetaker
or long-term suspension of the proposal by the n.a.n moderation team."

KTC
-- 
Experience is a good school but the fees are high.
    - Heinrich Heine

"KTC" <me@here.com> wrote in message news:btp7sf$23dq$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> "Walter" wrote...
> >
> > I'd like to wait until after SDWest, and 1.0 is released (early
> March). That
> Sure, the whole process takes about 2-3 months anyway. You just decide
> when it is the best timing for submitting a formal proposal & then the
> PQ for the actual votes... The formal proposal need to be work on
> first anyway so we can do that in the mean time.

Ok, let's do it.

> However this community try to promote it when the time comes (i.e. telling people how/when to vote etc.), just need to make sure there will be no violation of any of the "Guidelines for Big Eight Newsgroup Creation". Namely one of the most important being:
>
>     "The explicit voting instructions in the CFV may not be
> distributed, in whole or in part, to any forum, by anyone except the
> votetaker. People wishing to vote should be referred to the CFV posted
> in news.announce.newgroups or told to contact the votetaker for a
> copy. Violations may result in invalidation of votes by the votetaker
> or long-term suspension of the proposal by the n.a.n moderation team."

And we'll do it by the book!

"Walter" <walter@digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:btpmol$303c$1@digitaldaemon.com...
>
> "KTC" <me@here.com> wrote in message
news:btp7sf$23dq$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> > "Walter" wrote...
> > >
> > > I'd like to wait until after SDWest, and 1.0 is released (early
> > March). That
> > Sure, the whole process takes about 2-3 months anyway. You just decide
> > when it is the best timing for submitting a formal proposal & then the
> > PQ for the actual votes... The formal proposal need to be work on
> > first anyway so we can do that in the mean time.
>
> Ok, let's do it.
>
> > However this community try to promote it when the time comes (i.e. telling people how/when to vote etc.), just need to make sure there will be no violation of any of the "Guidelines for Big Eight Newsgroup Creation". Namely one of the most important being:
> >
> >     "The explicit voting instructions in the CFV may not be
> > distributed, in whole or in part, to any forum, by anyone except the
> > votetaker. People wishing to vote should be referred to the CFV posted
> > in news.announce.newgroups or told to contact the votetaker for a
> > copy. Violations may result in invalidation of votes by the votetaker
> > or long-term suspension of the proposal by the n.a.n moderation team."
>
> And we'll do it by the book!

I must be thick or something. I failed to grok how one might fall foul of the process.

"Matthew" wrote...
> > >
> > >     "The explicit voting instructions in the CFV may not be
> > > distributed, in whole or in part, to any forum, by anyone except
the
> > > votetaker. People wishing to vote should be referred to the CFV
posted
> > > in news.announce.newgroups or told to contact the votetaker for
a
> > > copy. Violations may result in invalidation of votes by the
votetaker
> > > or long-term suspension of the proposal by the n.a.n moderation
team."
> >
> > And we'll do it by the book!
>
> I must be thick or something. I failed to grok how one might fall
foul of
> the process.
>
>

Ah you usually won't, but people could get overly excited sometimes with trying to get other people to vote that they post in newsgroups or mailing list the instructions of how to vote etc...

Anyway, now that decided we're going to do it, need to sort out whos
actually going to work on the formal proposal etc.
Marco??

>I think it's pretty close. I'm finishing up what I hope will be the last bit of new features, and then it'll be bug fixing. D 1.0 will probably be the most powerful 1.0 language ever released!

There is no C++-Standard before C++98. So this is version 1.0 and it's still more powerfull that D.