www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - DIP attack

reply "Dicebot" <m.strashun gmail.com> writes:
There has been quite an explosion of DIP count recently. With 
just 3 states (Approved/Superseded/Draft) it becomes quite hard 
to have a quick overview of what actually happens on topic.

Shouldn't more precise categorization be added? I can imagine 
(Draft/Approved - Needs Implementation/Implemented/Rejected/Needs 
Improvements) as minimal useful state set. Some of DIPs rot there 
for eternity with an uncertain future.
Apr 08 2013
next sibling parent reply Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2013-04-08 10:34, Dicebot wrote:

 There has been quite an explosion of DIP count recently. With just 3
 states (Approved/Superseded/Draft) it becomes quite hard to have a quick
 overview of what actually happens on topic.

 Shouldn't more precise categorization be added? I can imagine
 (Draft/Approved - Needs Implementation/Implemented/Rejected/Needs
 Improvements) as minimal useful state set. Some of DIPs rot there for
 eternity with an uncertain future.


I think we need something similar to the review queue. Also, what's the 
point of DIP's if none of the core developers are looking at them. I'm 
pretty sure that I've seen several DIP's that have no comments from 
Walter or Andrei.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg
Apr 08 2013
next sibling parent reply "Dicebot" <m.strashun gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 8 April 2013 at 11:16:05 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:

 On 2013-04-08 10:34, Dicebot wrote:

 There has been quite an explosion of DIP count recently. With 
 just 3
 states (Approved/Superseded/Draft) it becomes quite hard to 
 have a quick
 overview of what actually happens on topic.

 Shouldn't more precise categorization be added? I can imagine
 (Draft/Approved - Needs 
 Implementation/Implemented/Rejected/Needs
 Improvements) as minimal useful state set. Some of DIPs rot 
 there for
 eternity with an uncertain future.


 I think we need something similar to the review queue. Also, 
 what's the point of DIP's if none of the core developers are 
 looking at them. I'm pretty sure that I've seen several DIP's 
 that have no comments from Walter or Andrei.


I am pretty sure about half of ones that have been added recently 
have no comments from Walter/Andrei. That worries me too, as it 
minimizes difference between DIP and random newsgroup thread.

Full review analog may be an overkill, but at least clear 
indication of DIP state is a must, in my opinion.
Apr 08 2013
parent reply Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:
On 4/8/13 7:19 AM, Dicebot wrote:

 On Monday, 8 April 2013 at 11:16:05 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:

 On 2013-04-08 10:34, Dicebot wrote:

 There has been quite an explosion of DIP count recently. With just 3
 states (Approved/Superseded/Draft) it becomes quite hard to have a quick
 overview of what actually happens on topic.

 Shouldn't more precise categorization be added? I can imagine
 (Draft/Approved - Needs Implementation/Implemented/Rejected/Needs
 Improvements) as minimal useful state set. Some of DIPs rot there for
 eternity with an uncertain future.


 I think we need something similar to the review queue. Also, what's
 the point of DIP's if none of the core developers are looking at them.
 I'm pretty sure that I've seen several DIP's that have no comments
 from Walter or Andrei.


 I am pretty sure about half of ones that have been added recently have
 no comments from Walter/Andrei. That worries me too, as it minimizes
 difference between DIP and random newsgroup thread.

 Full review analog may be an overkill, but at least clear indication of
 DIP state is a must, in my opinion.


No need to worry. Authoring a DIP indicates a willingness of the author 
to formalize a request, submit it to community scrutiny, and bring it to 
good shape before it is formally reviewed.

Andrei
Apr 08 2013
parent "Dicebot" <m.strashun gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 8 April 2013 at 15:50:35 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu 
wrote:

 No need to worry. Authoring a DIP indicates a willingness of 
 the author to formalize a request, submit it to community 
 scrutiny, and bring it to good shape before it is formally 
 reviewed.

 Andrei


Sure, I understand that, but, as an author of one of DIPs I have 
no idea if my DIP was even read by you or Walter. It was 
announced and all minor issues highlighted by community were 
addressed. What now? Is still it lacking something? Is it 
preapproved and waiting for a pull request? Conceptually 
rejected? I have no idea. And know even less about other DIPs.

Usual "do pull request and then we will see" does not really work 
here, as implementing new lagnauge feature is often a 
considerable amount of efforts and some for of pre-approvement 
can really help.
Apr 08 2013
prev sibling parent reply Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:
On 4/8/13 7:16 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:

 On 2013-04-08 10:34, Dicebot wrote:

 There has been quite an explosion of DIP count recently. With just 3
 states (Approved/Superseded/Draft) it becomes quite hard to have a quick
 overview of what actually happens on topic.

 Shouldn't more precise categorization be added? I can imagine
 (Draft/Approved - Needs Implementation/Implemented/Rejected/Needs
 Improvements) as minimal useful state set. Some of DIPs rot there for
 eternity with an uncertain future.


 I think we need something similar to the review queue. Also, what's the
 point of DIP's if none of the core developers are looking at them. I'm
 pretty sure that I've seen several DIP's that have no comments from
 Walter or Andrei.


DIPs' semi-formal manner helps a lot fostering community discussion well 
before they're up for approval.

Andrei
Apr 08 2013
parent reply Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2013-04-08 17:46, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:


 DIPs' semi-formal manner helps a lot fostering community discussion well
 before they're up for approval.


Yes, but currently I don't think it's much difference compared to a 
newsgroup post.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg
Apr 08 2013
parent reply Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:
On 4/8/13 3:00 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:

 On 2013-04-08 17:46, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:


 DIPs' semi-formal manner helps a lot fostering community discussion well
 before they're up for approval.


 Yes, but currently I don't think it's much difference compared to a
 newsgroup post.


Newsgroup posts come and go. Big difference.

Andrei
Apr 08 2013
parent reply "Dicebot" <m.strashun gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 8 April 2013 at 21:12:37 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu 
wrote:

 Newsgroup posts come and go. Big difference.

 Andrei


DIPs stay and rot. Big difference.
So I suppose you don't think any improvements need to be done for 
this process right now?
Apr 09 2013
parent reply Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:
On 4/9/13 4:11 AM, Dicebot wrote:

 On Monday, 8 April 2013 at 21:12:37 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 Newsgroup posts come and go. Big difference.

 Andrei


 DIPs stay and rot. Big difference.


I was making an actual argument, sarcasm is uncalled for. It has been a 
long standing problem with this community that good ideas and good 
articles got lost because they scrolled away in the Usenet stream.


 So I suppose you don't think any improvements need to be done for this
 process right now?


We are only at the beginning with DIPs. Of course we need to make a ton 
of improvements.


Andrei
Apr 09 2013
parent "Dicebot" <m.strashun gmail.com> writes:
On Tuesday, 9 April 2013 at 12:59:09 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu 
wrote:

 On 4/9/13 4:11 AM, Dicebot wrote:

 On Monday, 8 April 2013 at 21:12:37 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu 
 wrote:

 Newsgroup posts come and go. Big difference.

 Andrei


 DIPs stay and rot. Big difference.


 I was making an actual argument, sarcasm is uncalled for. It 
 has been a long standing problem with this community that good 
 ideas and good articles got lost because they scrolled away in 
 the Usenet stream.


And I am saying exactly it is not that much different if they are 
not actually processed, as soon as language improvements are 
desired goal, not some kind of encyclopedia. Sure, it is better, 
I agree. But it is still seriously lacking and don't scale to 
even current amount of DIPs.


 So I suppose you don't think any improvements need to be done 
 for this
 process right now?


 We are only at the beginning with DIPs. Of course we need to 
 make a ton of improvements.


Really glad to here it. Problem is, process change initiative 
here needs to be launched by either you or Walter because you are 
the two who make final decisions on DIPs. This can't be pure 
community effort.

Or should I make DIP about changing DIP process? :)
Apr 09 2013
prev sibling parent reply Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:
On 4/8/13 4:34 AM, Dicebot wrote:

 There has been quite an explosion of DIP count recently. With just 3
 states (Approved/Superseded/Draft) it becomes quite hard to have a quick
 overview of what actually happens on topic.

 Shouldn't more precise categorization be added? I can imagine
 (Draft/Approved - Needs Implementation/Implemented/Rejected/Needs
 Improvements) as minimal useful state set. Some of DIPs rot there for
 eternity with an uncertain future.


A good source of inspiration: http://docs.scala-lang.org/sips/

Andrei
Apr 08 2013
parent reply Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2013-04-08 17:26, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:


 A good source of inspiration: http://docs.scala-lang.org/sips/


I've read this:

http://docs.scala-lang.org/sips/sip-submission.html

And as far as I know our system for DIP's doesn't work anyway near 
what's described on that page. Or are you proposing it should?

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg
Apr 08 2013
parent Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:
On 4/8/13 3:04 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:

 On 2013-04-08 17:26, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:


 A good source of inspiration: http://docs.scala-lang.org/sips/


 I've read this:

 http://docs.scala-lang.org/sips/sip-submission.html

 And as far as I know our system for DIP's doesn't work anyway near
 what's described on that page. Or are you proposing it should?


Yes, it's for the future.

Andrei
Apr 08 2013