On Monday, 25 January 2016 at 16:20:50 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
Yeah, it's interesting. I recall thinking as I was drafting the
document: "One word... ONE word that doesn't sit well and it
will be all about that word." And now here we are. It's like
those presidential or Fed chairman press conferences... :o).
I changed http://wiki.dlang.org/Vision/2016H1.
Yea, let's paint that non-pacifistic bikeshed ;-)
In seriousness: I think the vision in terms of improving
engagement is fine, but what I would suggest in practice is to
focus carefully on the decision-making structure that is needed
in order for D to flourish.
That's going to involve some serious thought about, for example,
what sort of decisions Walter and yourself are happy delegating,
what circumstances you might reserve a veto or override, and how
to arrange things (and provide structured guidance) so that the
chances of you needing to pull those powers out are minimal.
It would also involve considering who gets a say about who sits
in various decision-making roles (for example, how to mix
top-down and bottom-up selection of people who will hold
positions of responsibility).
I think that getting that basic structure right may do a lot in
terms of making it possible to obtain, productively use, and
retain contributors on every possible level.
