On 2016-01-22 00:46, anonymous wrote:

> http://i.imgur.com/eJaKFtx.png
>
> The first one is the current logo. The last one shows just the core
> shape (D + moons), of course.

I vote the last one as the official out of context logo. I vote the third one for the web site.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg

On Saturday, 23 January 2016 at 01:23:20 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> ...
> And besides, calling something a "dictatorship" is again confusing the development of a programming language with running a government. I still fail to see the connection between the two.

Because maybe you don't read too much (outside programming), you can easily find the term being used on open source. i.e:

http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/articles/dictators_free_and_open_source_software

And it's not new, there are old articles like from 2004:

http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/stories/2004-08-17/linus-torvalds-benevolent-dictatorship


> (And BTW, I do not speak for this community either. What I express here are just my own opinions...
>

You don't need to draw for me that you're an user as much I am and if you're writing something of course it's your opinion.

I'm out for now, I'll don't reply anymore.

On 01/23/16 02:11, ronaldmc via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> 
> What happens if a technical feature is vetoed by someone is charge even if it has merit?

Every wrong decision affects the project negatively.


> Linux Foundation has a board members to approve or not new features or changes, and finally after that it goes to Linus, and overall after passed by the board it's almost approved by Linus too.

I'd just ignore this, but somebody might actually believe it's true...

Linux development works because Linus is right often enough. It really is that simple.


artur

On Saturday, 23 January 2016 at 15:41:43 UTC, ronaldmc wrote:
> On Saturday, 23 January 2016 at 01:23:20 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
>> [...]
>
> Because maybe you don't read too much (outside programming), you can easily find the term being used on open source. i.e:
>
> http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/articles/dictators_free_and_open_source_software
>
> And it's not new, there are old articles like from 2004:
>
> http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/stories/2004-08-17/linus-torvalds-benevolent-dictatorship
>
>
>>[...]
>
> You don't need to draw for me that you're an user as much I am and if you're writing something of course it's your opinion.
>
> I'm out for now, I'll don't reply anymore.

It's actually a very common term in FOSS.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benevolent_dictator_for_life

D is indeed Walter's ambition, and D2 is Walter/Andrei's. They have put the most effort into the project which is why their word gets the most weight, but I disagree with the notion that everyone else is shut out.

On Saturday, 23 January 2016 at 08:25:49 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> I always wanted it to be a gif so the planet would appear to be subtly rotating and the edge of Deimos might twinkle slightly :-)

If it was meant to be a git then it makes more sense why it was as it is originally (but without the borders). I always thought the circles on the D was confusing since very few people will recognize without being told what it is.

But when the rotation is added, it will be awesome!! (That is design).

On Friday, 22 January 2016 at 20:28:57 UTC, anonymous wrote:
> On 22.01.2016 20:53, ronaldmc wrote:
>> I don't want to start a war, but this isn't community? I mean aren't we
>> trying to make things better, because the way you said it seems like a
>> dictatorship.
>
> It's dictatorship insofar as Walter and Andrei have veto power. If they don't want something in, it doesn't go in. I don't think this is a problem in practice. If it was, the community could always fork the project and then play by their own rules.
>
> And of all things, the logo wouldn't be a good reason to divide over, in my opinion.


I am yet to see any good come from such decisions. Disagreement should not be a reason for division. YOU CAN NEVER GET WHAT YOU WANT IN ALL SITUATIONS (whether your are right or wrong). So please learn from people's mistakes like what happened between nodejs and iojs :)

Just a logo? Come on!!

D is the created programming language I have ever used.

On 1/23/2016 11:47 AM, karabuta wrote:
> On Saturday, 23 January 2016 at 08:25:49 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
>> I always wanted it to be a gif so the planet would appear to be subtly
>> rotating and the edge of Deimos might twinkle slightly :-)
>
> If it was meant to be a git then it makes more sense why it was as it is
> originally (but without the borders). I always thought the circles on the D was
> confusing since very few people will recognize without being told what it is.
>
> But when the rotation is added, it will be awesome!! (That is design).

Something like this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ou6JNQwPWE0&feature=player_detailpage#t=348

On Saturday, 23 January 2016 at 00:30:17 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> got this strange notion from.  Walter is the one who invented this language, and he has been generous enough to let the rest of us participate in its development.

Yes, I agree with this. If anything, bringing too much democracy into a design process makes things bloated and inconsistent. Walter has probably been too accepting of suggestions to new features in the past. But if someone steps up as a committed graphic designer it would be a good idea to give that person free hands. That's very motivating.

Meritocracy is not a horrible concept though. Implementing bad ideas and refusing good ideas based on who suggested it is just dumb. You need a lead designer that plots out what needs to be done and brings it all together as a whole.

That said, it would be downright silly to not accept the two bottom logos ;-).

On Saturday, 23 January 2016 at 18:58:21 UTC, Artur Skawina wrote:
> On 01/23/16 02:11, ronaldmc via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> Linux development works because Linus is right often enough. It really is that simple.

But I also think Linus weighs different solutions (and implementations and performance) before landing on a decision? So the "democratic" aspect is:

1. Being able to put forth different implementations for evaluation.

2. Being able to fork the project (SELinux?) and merge back the proven solutions.

Anyway, it is important that one person feel responsible for every single aspect of the design and is able to defend status quo of the whole.

Otherwise you get a blame game instead: "Oh, I didn't really agree with 50% of the features we added so I don't really know why they are there or if they should be there. You know, I told you guys it was a bad idea to have those features, so I think the ones that voted for them should fix it."

On 22.01.2016 00:46, anonymous wrote:
> http://i.imgur.com/eJaKFtx.png
[...]
> For dlang.org, I'd choose the version with the wide background arc. I
> think it looks nice on the menu bar, and it puts a little more emphasis
> there than just the core shape. But just the core shape looks fine, too.

I made a pull request for the wide one (the third one from the top):

https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dlang.org/pull/1212