Re: A New Era for the D Community
On 7/6/23 12:16 AM, IchorDev wrote: On Wednesday, 5 July 2023 at 21:50:37 UTC, Andrew wrote: Why not just improve Phobos itself? Make PRs to add new modules to std.experimental, announce them here and elsewhere on the web, and get the community to support it. Earlier in this thread it was pointed out that it's too arbitrary whether new modules will get accepted into `std.experimental` or not, therefore a fork that's more open to community contributions (whether good or bad), would be of value. As it is, some of Phobos is really great, some of it could do with more nothrow/custom allocator alternatives or a nicer API that clashes with itself less often, and some of it is just horrid. Yeah, we are better off going the std.sumtype route -- release on dub, and then incorporate into Phobos if desired. P.S. Who chose this silly name "std.experimental"? It might as well be "std.nonstandard". It's purposely unattractive. We learned from `javax` of Java. It was supposed to be an "experimental" package, but people complained about the possibility of moving things into `java` so much that they had to leave packages there. So we wanted to be very clear that packages in that branch of phobos are unstable, and could be removed/moved at any time. Use at your own risk. -Steve
Re: A New Era for the D Community
On Wednesday, 5 July 2023 at 21:50:37 UTC, Andrew wrote: Why not just improve Phobos itself? Make PRs to add new modules to std.experimental, announce them here and elsewhere on the web, and get the community to support it. Earlier in this thread it was pointed out that it's too arbitrary whether new modules will get accepted into `std.experimental` or not, therefore a fork that's more open to community contributions (whether good or bad), would be of value. As it is, some of Phobos is really great, some of it could do with more nothrow/custom allocator alternatives or a nicer API that clashes with itself less often, and some of it is just horrid. P.S. Who chose this silly name "std.experimental"? It might as well be "std.nonstandard".
Re: A New Era for the D Community
On Wednesday, 5 July 2023 at 20:03:26 UTC, IchorDev wrote: Perhaps a fork of Phobos that's more community-driven would be good for the language? Why not just improve Phobos itself? Make PRs to add new modules to std.experimental, announce them here and elsewhere on the web, and get the community to support it.
Re: A New Era for the D Community
On Saturday, 13 May 2023 at 15:58:12 UTC, ryuukk_ wrote: - better enums - tagged union - pattern matching - async - nullable - tuple/multiple return (deconstruction) - allocators (don't do them as classes/interface for the love of god) - implement GC as an allocator This is a nice list, however I'd like to point out that not all of these need to be language features. Nullable already exists in Phobos: https://dlang.org/library/std/typecons/nullable.html You might say it should be a language feature, but I nullable value-types are a bit weird—they can be a value that *isn't a value*. Pattern matching can be done in various ways, and the same to some extent with tuples. Perhaps a fork of Phobos that's more community-driven would be good for the language?
Re: A New Era for the D Community
On Tuesday, 27 June 2023 at 12:00:48 UTC, Mike Parker wrote: Anyway, the main point of this announcement wasn't IVY, it's that we're finally getting organized. IVY is just the tool we're using to do it. No D user or contributor needs to pay any attention to it if they don't want to. And I should add, for those who haven't seen it elsewhere, one of the changes we've made is that we've incorporated GitHub projects into our workflow (some of us more quickly than others). You can see what we're working on here: https://github.com/orgs/dlang/projects?query=is%3Aopen And if anyone sees something they'd like to pitch in on, please get in touch with me.
Re: A New Era for the D Community
On Tuesday, 27 June 2023 at 11:30:42 UTC, Francesco Mecca wrote: It would be great if you specify or at least give us a glimpse of what this "change" is about. Right now, it sounds like corporate propaganda for Ucora It's not propaganda. I answered questions about it in BeerConf last month, and Adam summarized it here: https://dpldocs.info/this-week-in-d/Blog.Posted_2023_05_29.html TLDR; it's about understanding stakeholder motivations and looking for opportunities where they align. Right now, we're just employing it internally to get our house in order. Down the road, when we're able to find volunteers to take on tasks (a few people have expressed interest already after the BeerConf session), understanding their motivations will help us know who to approach first for any given task. That's just one way in which we'll be employing it. It's helped me in recognizing opportunities I wouldn't have before, and it's had an impact on the way the DLF team conducts meetings and approaches problem solving and planning. Anyway, the main point of this announcement wasn't IVY, it's that we're finally getting organized. IVY is just the tool we're using to do it. No D user or contributor needs to pay any attention to it if they don't want to.
Re: A New Era for the D Community
On Wednesday, 3 May 2023 at 11:13:34 UTC, Mike Parker wrote: You're going to hear more about IVY as time goes by, and eventually, we're going to start employing it more broadly in the community. We now have a better idea of how to more effectively guide contributors so that they can be more efficient and stay motivated. Before we get to that point, we've got a lot of decisions to make and a lot of work to do internally to provide a foundation on which we can build. I'm not exaggerating when I say that this is going to be the most significant change in the D community in the 20 years I've been a part of it. I expect we're going to encounter bumps along the way, but that's okay. We now have a clear vision and purpose, and that makes all the difference. It would be great if you specify or at least give us a glimpse of what this "change" is about. Right now, it sounds like corporate propaganda for Ucora
Re: A New Era for the D Community
On Wednesday, 3 May 2023 at 11:13:34 UTC, Mike Parker wrote: Our enthusiasm is high, and we're ready to get going. I think you'll like where we're headed. Good job guys!! This reinforces my belief in what you do.
Re: A New Era for the D Community
On Wednesday, 3 May 2023 at 11:13:34 UTC, Mike Parker wrote: You're going to hear more about IVY as time goes by, and eventually, we're going to start employing it more broadly in the community. We now have a better idea of how to more effectively guide contributors so that they can be more efficient and stay motivated. Before we get to that point, we've got a lot of decisions to make and a lot of work to do internally to provide a foundation on which we can build. I'm not exaggerating when I say that this is going to be the most significant change in the D community in the 20 years I've been a part of it. I expect we're going to encounter bumps along the way, but that's okay. We now have a clear vision and purpose, and that makes all the difference. Those of us who participated in the IVY program are grateful to Ucora for presenting us with the opportunity. Not only will IVY help us in guiding D, but we can take what we've learned and apply it to other areas of our lives. They've given us a valuable gift. IVY is based on getting in touch with ones 'self', which presumably is on-topic here, since you've posted it. Does this mean getting in touch with ones' 'non-self' is also on topic? https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/contemplative-psychology/202002/how-find-your-non-self Is one valid for being on topic, and the other not? Or, should both be off-topic? And, if there's going to be a Dconf talk about 'self', can it be balanced with a talk about 'non-self'? Or do both talks have no place at Dconf?
Re: A New Era for the D Community
On Wednesday, 3 May 2023 at 23:24:53 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: This initiative has my full support. argh!!
Re: A New Era for the D Community
On Friday, 5 May 2023 at 16:58:37 UTC, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote: On Wednesday, 3 May 2023 at 11:13:34 UTC, Mike Parker wrote: I'm not exaggerating when I say that this is going to be the most significant change in the D community in the 20 years I've been a part of it. This sounds very exciting -- more than any details (which I'm sure we'll learn over time), I'm struck by the enthusiasm and confidence for the future of how D will be supported. I really look forward to learning more as things progress. Many thanks to Ucora for their investment of time, insight, and resources. +1
Re: A New Era for the D Community
On Saturday, 13 May 2023 at 15:58:12 UTC, ryuukk_ wrote: On Friday, 5 May 2023 at 11:26:26 UTC, Ogi wrote: Or it perhaps doesn't need that list and i am wrong in my analysis, wich is probably the case
Re: A New Era for the D Community
On Friday, 5 May 2023 at 11:26:26 UTC, Ogi wrote: On Wednesday, 3 May 2023 at 11:13:34 UTC, Mike Parker wrote: … That’s a lot of words but little actual sense. What makes you think that this IVY™ program is the silver bullet that D desperately needs? And not just yet another load of crap invented by some “consulting” firm as a relatively honest way of taking money from businesses? Because it’s sounds like one. I agree with that, it sounds like consulting propaganda D doesn't need more bureaucracy, it actually doesn't need at all, D needs developers who care about enhancing the language, and people with a vision for the future, so we can write proper stuff - better enums - tagged union - pattern matching - async - nullable - tuple/multiple return (deconstruction) - allocators (don't do them as classes/interface for the love of god) - implement GC as an allocator What will IVY do about that list? other than suck up time and resources Bunch of new languages coming, and the C part of D is still as old as C, untouched, and the Java/C# part of D is now behind Java/C#
Re: A New Era for the D Community
On Tuesday, 9 May 2023 at 12:27:30 UTC, FeepingCreature wrote: To be honest, this has always been my take as well. On Tuesday, 9 May 2023 at 15:46:12 UTC, Paul Backus wrote: I basically agree with this I feel if I was understood, only people with (at least) one foot out the door would agree easily. As it stands *anytime* *anyone* says "I want to help D" in the discord, I and several others basically go out of our way to dissuade that notion; *that's damning* to the long-term health of the language. Thats not changing on my end, Im practicing what I preach, minor political changes won't convince me. Can anyone tell me with a straight face that the last guy to say "Hi im new, d lacks a crypto lib in the std, is that something I could help with?" shouldn't have been told to avoid that like the plague? --- Michael Malice has this concept of "Nancy Pelosi 4th favorite ice cream"; every night she has a pint of icecream, 90% of the time she picks her favorite and so on. She hasn't eaten her 4th favorite icecream in 3 years, is she lying? (nancy says she is for freedom, but when asked if she would legalize meth/ legalize nukes/ get rid of all taxes, *said no everytime*) I think this leads to a "blunt fact" you can only have so many principles. Every official D codebase uses the official style guide, cares about the long-term vision, and who knows what other unstated requirements. I believe "coherent vision" must be discarded for some part of the process. "Management" does not always mean "telling people what to do". Sometimes (often!) it means removing roadblocks and bottlenecks that get in the way of people doing what they already want to do. The way I read the main post is not "We are changing our fundamental values to be more flexible" it's more "I'm making an effort to communicate the team's vision better". I don't believe this issue is that; I hear the team's vision very very loudly, I could tell you a few reasons why the std won't get new data structures this decade(much less the ones I would suggest). It's not a lack of communication of them to me, Im just willing to summarize "we can't make data structures, you should use @nogc @live and @safe, your code isn't our style, allocators are coming" to "no". D seems to plan on telling people what's acceptable at exactly the same rate, for the foreseeable future; I see nothing that would make anything I write acceptable to it. (Honestly, maybe 80% of the time when I've seen "D needs better management", it has been code for "D management didn't like my proposal.") Yes, d needs better management because d didn't like my proposal. I mean "anarchic" when I ask for a redesign of std.experimental. I don't see a future healthy growth of the language when any member of the dev team has a say on everything. I see no shuffling of decision-making capabilities that would resolve the issues. --- When I say "d has a community of meta-programming crazed iconoclasts" and "don't herd cats"; I do mean the community, genius doesn't necessarily play nice with others or lead people to work *for free* with poor working conditions. I'm not really saying nice things about myself or the other people who left or are unwilling to contribute for whatever reason. But I would suggest the solution to courting the iconoclastic elements isn't with something tested in corporate culture, corporations generally pay to have people tolerate their demands, D must compete with the freedom of doing your own project.
Re: A New Era for the D Community
On Sunday, 7 May 2023 at 02:15:02 UTC, monkyyy wrote: On Wednesday, 3 May 2023 at 11:13:34 UTC, Mike Parker wrote: IVY, their organizational development program Your solution to hearing luas dev saying "I dont manage anything" and whatever feedback from your survey, is you got corporate training and now you gun-ho about management? Was I in an extreme minority here? https://monkyyyscience.substack.com/i/93037044/stop-pretending-d-is-a-corporate-language [...] Don't herd cats, just clean out the litter boxes. I basically agree with this--but IMO there are a lot of litter boxes that could use cleaning out, and I'm hopeful that this new approach will help D's leadership do so more effectively. "Management" does not always mean "telling people what to do". Sometimes (often!) it means removing roadblocks and bottlenecks that get in the way of people doing what they already *want* to do.
Re: A New Era for the D Community
On Sunday, 7 May 2023 at 02:15:02 UTC, monkyyy wrote: On Wednesday, 3 May 2023 at 11:13:34 UTC, Mike Parker wrote: IVY, their organizational development program Your solution to hearing luas dev saying "I dont manage anything" and whatever feedback from your survey, is you got corporate training and now you gun-ho about management? Was I in an extreme minority here? https://monkyyyscience.substack.com/i/93037044/stop-pretending-d-is-a-corporate-language *Stop pretending D is a corporate language* You have a community of meta-programming-crazed iconoclasts Either you believe this small community has great 1000x programmers or you don't and we are doomed anyway If Adr says "I want to make a color lib", don't stand in his way give him the namespace std.community.color that can be written to his style guide, to his standards, on his github, and when a new version of the compiler ships a script will grab a snapshot Please redesign and relaunch `std.experimental` to have a completely hands-off, anarchic structure. I'm confused how you came to the conclusion that complaints about management mean there should be more management instead of a fundamentally different approach. Don't herd cats, just clean out the litter boxes. To be honest, this has always been my take as well. I don't want to be critical here, because I have no idea what IVY is and what is supposed to come of this, but I have seen people for years saying that D has a management problem, and this has always seemed wrong to me. D has an effort and agreement problem, but that's not something you can manage in a community of volunteers. Management implies an ability to focus effort. Broadly, D doesn't have users who want to improve D, D has users who want to improve doing X *with D.* Now D management can say "we want to reach style X" or "we are working on improvement Y"; they can do this by setting review standards and only merging PRs that go in the direction they want the project to do. But they cannot decide what work gets done - only accept or reject. Isn't the point of the DIP process primarily to be able to forecast whether a feature will be accepted or rejected? So managing the work requires an inherently reactive approach. This is why I never understood why people were saying D "needed better management". What work got done has always been, in this language, a matter of some person saying "I could do this cool thing" and going and doing it. This can be mismanaged, sure, and there's room for improvement, granted, but better management can still not make improvements appear where currently there are none. (Honestly, maybe 80% of the time when I've seen "D needs better management", it has been code for "D management didn't like my proposal.")
Re: A New Era for the D Community
On Wednesday, 3 May 2023 at 11:13:34 UTC, Mike Parker wrote: IVY, their organizational development program Your solution to hearing luas dev saying "I dont manage anything" and whatever feedback from your survey, is you got corporate training and now you gun-ho about management? Was I in an extreme minority here? https://monkyyyscience.substack.com/i/93037044/stop-pretending-d-is-a-corporate-language *Stop pretending D is a corporate language* You have a community of meta-programming-crazed iconoclasts Either you believe this small community has great 1000x programmers or you don't and we are doomed anyway If Adr says "I want to make a color lib", don't stand in his way give him the namespace std.community.color that can be written to his style guide, to his standards, on his github, and when a new version of the compiler ships a script will grab a snapshot Please redesign and relaunch `std.experimental` to have a completely hands-off, anarchic structure. I'm confused how you came to the conclusion that complaints about management mean there should be more management instead of a fundamentally different approach. Don't herd cats, just clean out the litter boxes.
Re: A New Era for the D Community
On Wednesday, 3 May 2023 at 11:13:34 UTC, Mike Parker wrote: Ucora’s long-term vision is [to change the way the world works](https://ucora.com/). As part of their mission, they provide organizations with the tools they need to transform the way they work. [IVY, their organizational development program](https://ucora.com/solutions/organizational-development/), is a simple but innovative approach to workflow. Ucora has been using D for several years. They're invested in D's success, and so they want the DLF to be successful. Paul offered to put the DLF team through the IVY program at no charge. We accepted, and every Friday for the past 14 weeks we've been having sessions with Saeed Sabeti, Ucora's Director of Organizational Development. May 5th will be our 15th and final session. Hi Mike, Thanks for the update. This is very interesting! -ikel
Re: A New Era for the D Community
On Wednesday, 3 May 2023 at 11:13:34 UTC, Mike Parker wrote: I'm not exaggerating when I say that this is going to be the most significant change in the D community in the 20 years I've been a part of it. I expect we're going to encounter bumps along the way, but that's okay. We now have a clear vision and purpose, and that makes all the difference. This sounds very exciting -- more than any details (which I'm sure we'll learn over time), I'm struck by the enthusiasm and confidence for the future of how D will be supported. I really look forward to learning more as things progress. Many thanks to Ucora for their investment of time, insight, and resources.
Re: A New Era for the D Community
On Friday, 5 May 2023 at 11:26:26 UTC, Ogi wrote: On Wednesday, 3 May 2023 at 11:13:34 UTC, Mike Parker wrote: … That’s a lot of words but little actual sense. What makes you think that this IVY™ program is the silver bullet that D desperately needs? And not just yet another load of crap invented by some “consulting” firm as a relatively honest way of taking money from businesses? Because it’s sounds like one. Because we went through the program and can see how it's going to benefit us. It's not automatically going to make things better. We have to do the work. But the point is, now we know how to do the work, whereas before we were just throwing things at the wall to see what stuck. People around here frequently complain about bad management. Through the IVY program we, all of us non-managers, learned an approach to management that makes sense to us. It's going to change the way we do things, and we're all confident the change will be for the better. Ucora's workflow is built around IVY as well. Saeed shared with us some of the ways they use it so that we could better see how we can employ it. He's also made himself available to help us as we go along. They're serious about it, and so are we. You'll hear more about it before and during DConf. After, I expect it will become part of the common lexicon in the D community.
Re: A New Era for the D Community
On Wednesday, 3 May 2023 at 11:13:34 UTC, Mike Parker wrote: … That’s a lot of words but little actual sense. What makes you think that this IVY™ program is the silver bullet that D desperately needs? And not just yet another load of crap invented by some “consulting” firm as a relatively honest way of taking money from businesses? Because it’s sounds like one.
Re: A New Era for the D Community
On Wednesday, 3 May 2023 at 11:13:34 UTC, Mike Parker wrote: ... Our enthusiasm is high, and we're ready to get going. I think you'll like where we're headed. Interesting. Good luck with the endeavor! Ivan Kazmenko.
Re: A New Era for the D Community
On Wednesday, 3 May 2023 at 23:24:53 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: This initiative has my full support. While I have ceased using D because of my concerns about the project's future (I discussed my reasons in a previous message that don't need to be repeated), I have continued to check this forum occasionally, hoping to see the slope turn positive. Mike's message and your response are both the kind of thing I was hoping for. While there is no guarantee that the effort Mike describes will have the desired outcome, the mere fact that the effort has been made and endorsed by you is a significant positive step. I'm sure I needn't tell you that technical work and project management require related but different talents. I did both professionally for a very long time and I certainly was not equally good at both. You can probably guess which one was the laggard. But I have seen it done well, having worked for some really great managers. One who deserves mention is the late Frank Heart. The ARPANet (and thus the Internet) would not have existed without Frank's unique ability to herd the brilliant cats at BBN 50+ years ago. He's in the Internet Hall of Fame, deservedly. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Heart. Some of the great people in the history of computer science are in the picture on that page, including Bob Kahn, who, with Vint Cerf, won the Turing Award. Both played absolutely key roles in the development of the Internet. I really hope that this is the start of something good for this project. A lot of value has been built here, but the project has obviously foundered in an organizational way. Project management is difficult, so the trouble is not surprising or unique. The key is recognizing that the problems are happening and taking steps that have a reasonable probability of improving the situation. I will watch how this unfolds with great interest. /Don Allen
Re: A New Era for the D Community
On Wednesday, 3 May 2023 at 23:42:37 UTC, max haughton wrote: On Wednesday, 3 May 2023 at 23:17:28 UTC, MissPiggy wrote: On Wednesday, 3 May 2023 at 11:13:34 UTC, Mike Parker wrote: Our enthusiasm is high, and we're ready to get going. I think you'll like where we're headed. IVY may increase the probability of a particular outcome, but it cannot predict a particular outcome. OK? You simply cannot ever know the position and velocity of every atom in the universe. Luckily some very clever physicists have worked out that this task is a fools errand and instead one *can* model the interesting large scale dynamics of the system extremely well (until you can't, but still). You're going to hear more about IVY as time goes by, and eventually, we're going to start employing it more broadly in the community. Whether you can in fact 'deploy' IVY into the 'broader community'... well..that remains to be seen. It's more likely, I think, that D's 'future' will be increasingly determined by the priorities of a select group of corporations, rather than any psychological/behavioural science. Ignoring that this statement doesn't make any sense (IVY is but a tool): Let's not bother then eh — I'm sure Mike, who is the main liaison between these groups, hasn't put any thought into this. I don't believe my post required this kind of response. Check your motivations please. First, I was simply stating the obvious.. that there are always things that are not under your control. You can predict possibilities of an outcome only (where such variables are in play). This is not the same as saying you shouldn't try, which was your criticism against something I never said. Second, I was simply stating the obvious (e.g who attends these regular meetings? Increasingly, its business oriented, isn't it? That is not a criticism. Other languages have also been driven by business priorities, and have succeeded very well. Whether this is true for D, remains to be seen. When I go on a road trip, even when I know where I want to get to, doesn't mean I'm going to get there. It also doesn't mean I'm not going to go on a road trip.
Re: A New Era for the D Community
On Wednesday, 3 May 2023 at 23:17:28 UTC, MissPiggy wrote: On Wednesday, 3 May 2023 at 11:13:34 UTC, Mike Parker wrote: Our enthusiasm is high, and we're ready to get going. I think you'll like where we're headed. IVY may increase the probability of a particular outcome, but it cannot predict a particular outcome. OK? You simply cannot ever know the position and velocity of every atom in the universe. Luckily some very clever physicists have worked out that this task is a fools errand and instead one *can* model the interesting large scale dynamics of the system extremely well (until you can't, but still). You're going to hear more about IVY as time goes by, and eventually, we're going to start employing it more broadly in the community. Whether you can in fact 'deploy' IVY into the 'broader community'... well..that remains to be seen. It's more likely, I think, that D's 'future' will be increasingly determined by the priorities of a select group of corporations, rather than any psychological/behavioural science. Ignoring that this statement doesn't make any sense (IVY is but a tool): Let's not bother then eh — I'm sure Mike, who is the main liaison between these groups, hasn't put any thought into this.
Re: A New Era for the D Community
This initiative has my full support.
Re: A New Era for the D Community
On Wednesday, 3 May 2023 at 11:13:34 UTC, Mike Parker wrote: Our enthusiasm is high, and we're ready to get going. I think you'll like where we're headed. IVY may increase the probability of a particular outcome, but it cannot predict a particular outcome. We still can't even predict weather forecasts all that well either. You simply cannot ever know the position and velocity of every atom in the universe. You're going to hear more about IVY as time goes by, and eventually, we're going to start employing it more broadly in the community. Whether you can in fact 'deploy' IVY into the 'broader community'... well..that remains to be seen. It's more likely, I think, that D's 'future' will be increasingly determined by the priorities of a select group of corporations, rather than any psychological/behavioural science.
Re: A New Era for the D Community
On Wednesday, 3 May 2023 at 11:13:34 UTC, Mike Parker wrote: ... Exciting news!
Re: A New Era for the D Community
On 5/3/23 7:13 AM, Mike Parker wrote: Our enthusiasm is high, and we're ready to get going. I think you'll like where we're headed. This all sounds awesome! -Steve
Re: A New Era for the D Community
On 5/3/23 05:08, Mike Parker wrote: On Wednesday, 3 May 2023 at 11:37:31 UTC, Nicholas Wilson wrote: From memory that was merely an AGM at DConf, but sure, I'll take credit for that (despite knowing next to nothing about management)! The AGM was your idea, but so were the regular meetings. You pushed it to Ali in 2018. I have a second-hand email record! Wow! I wouldn't have remembered but it's an email I wrote on November 3, 2018, which starts with "Nicholas Wilson visited the Bay Area for an LLVM conference and I had a couple of chances to see him." Good old days! :) Ali
Re: A New Era for the D Community
On Wednesday, 3 May 2023 at 11:37:31 UTC, Nicholas Wilson wrote: From memory that was merely an AGM at DConf, but sure, I'll take credit for that (despite knowing next to nothing about management)! The AGM was your idea, but so were the regular meetings. You pushed it to Ali in 2018. I have a second-hand email record!
Re: A New Era for the D Community
On Wednesday, 3 May 2023 at 11:13:34 UTC, Mike Parker wrote: Yes, there have been improvements over the past few years. The quarterly DLF meetings with industry representatives, initially proposed by Nicholas Wilson, have been productive. From memory that was merely an AGM at DConf, but sure, I'll take credit for that (despite knowing next to nothing about management)!
Re: A New Era for the D Community
Very interesting. I just want to say, I'm having repeated unrelated CI failures for: https://github.com/dlang/phobos/pull/8699 Yesterday I finally said right stuff this I don't have the energy to fight the CI on this anymore and asked Razvan to kinda take over as the changes on my end are fundamentally done. This may not seem very important, but to Symmetry, without Razvan I'd honestly just close that PR and leave 500ms reduction in compile times when you import std.regex on the table. Having this extra support in the community who can tackle this sort of issues is both highly appreciated and highly motivational for unblocking people in the future. Much appreciation all round, long may it continue!
Re: A New Era for the D Community
Sounds awesome Mike, really does. As long as transparency remains a key objective, I think everyone is on board.
A New Era for the D Community
At DConf '22, Roberto Ierusalimschy, the lead designer of [the Lua programming language](https://www.lua.org/), was [our guest keynote speaker](https://youtu.be/H3inzGGFefg). At the end of his talk, Robert Schadek [asked him how he organized the Lua community](https://youtu.be/H3inzGGFefg?t=3223). His answer: Is it too ugly if I say I don't? In [my talk at the same conference](https://youtu.be/gk_QjjxCGSY), I highlighted part of the history of the D community's evolution. I used the metaphor of a pioneer settlement that evolved into a village and then into a town. In those early pioneering days, Walter's approach to organizing the community was the same as Roberto's. He didn't need to do anything. The community organized itself and built from scratch the foundations of the ecosystem we have today. If you discovered D and expected only to be a user and never a contributor, then D just wasn't for you. Of course, as the community grew and evolved, and built up more of the ecosystem, there was increasing space for noncontributors. That, in turn, led to shifting expectations. At different points in D's history, Walter, Andrei, and motivated community members took steps to adapt to changing expectations. For several years they were able to keep up reasonably well. To give just one example, in the earliest days, users posted bug reports in the forums or by emailing Walter, and contributors emailed him patches. In response to calls for better bug management, a community member volunteered to maintain a Bugzilla instance. Then later, when people were wondering why they had to submit patches to Bugzilla when GitHub existed, Walter was persuaded to put the compiler's source on GitHub. By the time Walter and Andrei established the D Language Foundation in 2015, they had settled into a very loose management style. Motivated community members volunteered to create services, or take charge of something in the ecosystem, and Walter and Andrei would give their blessing. I can't speak to what their goals were with the Foundation, but they largely continued that approach to managing the ecosystem. Unfortunately, as the community continued to grow and expectations continued to evolve, that approach was unsustainable. Ten years ago, if the forums went down, everyone knew to contact Vladimir Panteleev. Today, many people don't know, and probably don't care, that he pays for and maintains the server on which the forums are hosted. The forums are on dlang.org, the official website of the D Language Foundation, so the DLF is responsible for getting things back up. When a bug report remains open for years, it doesn't matter that it's because it hasn't come to the attention of someone with the time, ability, and motivation to fix it. The DLF is responsible for organizing resources to address reported issues, and if we can't, that's on us. One of the biggest complaints I've heard over the past few years is some form of "lack of leadership/management/vision". It's painful to hear, as I know that everyone involved with the DLF is personally invested. We're here because we love what we're doing. Yet, the criticism is on the mark. Yes, there have been improvements over the past few years. The quarterly DLF meetings with industry representatives, initially proposed by Nicholas Wilson, have been productive. The monthly meetings that grew out of those have led to several positive changes. Symmetry's sponsorship of the Pull Request and Issue Manager positions held by Razvan Nitu and Dennis Korpel has been a huge boon. We've begun migrating some ecosystem services to DLF servers (it's going very slowly, but it's happening). We've done several good things that I could enumerate here. But collectively, it's the equivalent of being surrounded by small fires and running around to put them out at random. We simply do not have a structured system of management. Several times over the past couple of years, we discussed what to do about it. We read books, watched presentations, and asked for advice. We got nowhere. Then, in July of last year, Paul Toth of Ucora reached out with an offer. Had I known at the time that it was going to change everything, I would have put it at the top of my priority list. Alas, it wasn't until November that things started moving. Ucora’s long-term vision is [to change the way the world works](https://ucora.com/). As part of their mission, they provide organizations with the tools they need to transform the way they work. [IVY, their organizational development program](https://ucora.com/solutions/organizational-development/), is a simple but innovative approach to workflow. Ucora has been using D for several years. They're invested in D's success, and so they want the DLF to be successful. Paul offered to put the DLF team through the IVY program at no charge. We accepted, and every Friday for the past 14 weeks we've been having sessions
