On Wednesday, 22 May 2013 at 18:46:55 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
I have not so much problem with the breaking in it self. It's rather that there are several people here pretending D is stable.
I think that on the surface, saying something is "stable" makes it sound like that is always good. So it's a public relations win if you can say your product is stable. But the truth is that if what is "stable" is a really bad design decision or a flat out bug, then that kind of "stability" is bad. But since so many people think stability is always good (it certainly *sounds* good), I can understand why there is a reluctance to admit that there is a lack of stability.
If only there were a way to communicate, "Yes, there is a lack of stability, but it's for darn good reasons!" Until that way is found, there must always be a tension between doing the "right thing", and convincing people it's more "stable" than it really is.
