(sorry for being a bit late, was distracted)
std.logger proposal by Robert Schadek enters voting period which
will last two weeks starting from now.
Discussion thread :
http://forum.dlang.org/post/[email protected]
This voting will be somewhat different from previous ones because
it will be done with std.experimental in mind. Because of that
please reply with a bit more structured votes:
1) Yes / No for inclusion into std.experimental
At this point please consider if module has functionality you
want to see in standard library in general and if implementation
is not fundamentally broken. This is a simple sanity check.
2) Yes / No for inclusion into Phobos in its current state
This is where you should summarize your concerns raised during
review if there are any and make decision if existing API /
architecture are promising enough to be set in stone via Phobos
inclusion.
3) If you have answered "No" for (2) : list of mandatory changes
that are needed to make you vote "Yes"
4) Any additional comments for author.
Please separate (3) from (4) in some obvious fashion to make it
possible for author to prioritize of feedback. Please use linked
thread for discussions and only post vote + summary here.
Currently only answer for (1) affects the voting outcome. Other
answers are necessary to eventually prepare std.logger for
second voting during beta period of some future release (for
actual inclusion into Phobos).
If you have any comments / proposals about actual voting
procedure or review process please create separate thread.
Go ahead ;)
