As I have briefly mentioned in the NG before, I'd like to take over DIP management and turn it into something more transparent and powerful compared to what we have now.
Rationale --------- There are two major goals that motivate me here: 1) Lack of reliable communication mechanism with language authors. Existing DIP list is simply a collection of ideas that may or may not be looked at - not as easily lost as NG topic but not much different in all other regards. But of course it is impossible for Andrei and Walter to put enough attentions in all proposal to guaranteed response and decision for each of them - it takes too much time to dive into the context to only discover that specific DIP lacks some crucial bit of information. 2) Necessity to have a centralized place to track major language/process changes. One of greatest issues of using D at work for me is a constant fear that upstream will make a major language change that harms our projects without noticing it timely. It is not reasonable to expect for all commercial D users to regularly read through NG and Github issues to provide feedback on matters important for them. DIP system can be a great way to fix it. If all major changes are required to undergo DIP approval process, it becomes possible to simply subscribe to the feed of approved DIPs to figure out what is coming upstream. Proposal -------- I have described my vision of new process here: https://github.com/Dicebot/DIPs , check https://github.com/Dicebot/DIPs/blob/master/README.md for actual description. Essentially it tries to address transparency issue by minimizing routine information digging effort on Andrei and Walter side and make the process more stable by introducing regular short meetings and/or mail discussions for DIP review. If new process is to be approved, this repo is to be moved to dlang organization and becomes the main place for DIP management. @Andrei / @Walter ----------------- Crucial point of new proposed system is your commitment to schedule regular time for DIP review. It is not that important how rare such review happen and what exact format (mail thread or skype call or whatever) it takes - the goal is to do it in a way most convenient to you. However it does needs to be regular and reliable which makes this proposed system only feasible if you can agree to such commitment. @all ---- Please express your concerns ;)
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ dmd-internals mailing list [email protected] http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-internals
