• Kris (7/7) Nov 18 2007 There's recently been a couple of notable threads that I recall over Tan...
• Clay Smith (3/10) Nov 18 2007 People are simply opinionated. Programmers especially so.
• Sean Kelly (3/14) Nov 18 2007 I disagree. ;-)
• BCS (2/11) Nov 18 2007 digitalmars.d.tango ????
• 0ffh (5/6) Nov 19 2007 ++votes, splendid idea, old chap!
• Alix Pexton (15/24) Nov 19 2007 To me, it seems that both D and Tango are developed with a similar air o...
• Sean Kelly (13/39) Nov 19 2007 I can see how some people may feel this way. However, the bulk of
• Alix Pexton (4/50) Nov 19 2007 I prefer to be able to take my time and consider how I word my opinions ...
• Bruce Adams (6/26) Nov 20 2007 veiled ;) but agreed. It would be nice to know more about what's happeni...
• Tomas Lindquist Olsen (2/2) Nov 19 2007 I think it's a bad idea. If you really want to talk tango on these

"Kris" <foo bar.com> writes:

There's recently been a couple of notable threads that I recall over Tango, 
which have been entirely non-constructive, and revolved almost entirely 
around small details such as module naming conventions.  It's like there's 
some kind of fear and loathing seething under the surface. I'm wondering 
whether it's because Tango is not generally discussed in the ng at all. I 
mean, it is developed and maintained completely /outside/ of this ng 
environment. Is there some basis for this notion? 

Clay Smith <clayasaurus gmail.com> writes:

Kris wrote:
 There's recently been a couple of notable threads that I recall over Tango, 
 which have been entirely non-constructive, and revolved almost entirely 
 around small details such as module naming conventions.  It's like there's 
 some kind of fear and loathing seething under the surface. I'm wondering 
 whether it's because Tango is not generally discussed in the ng at all. I 
 mean, it is developed and maintained completely /outside/ of this ng 
 environment. Is there some basis for this notion? 

People are simply opinionated. Programmers especially so.

~ Clay

Sean Kelly <sean f4.ca> writes:

Clay Smith wrote:
 Kris wrote:
 There's recently been a couple of notable threads that I recall over 
 Tango, which have been entirely non-constructive, and revolved almost 
 entirely around small details such as module naming conventions.  It's 
 like there's some kind of fear and loathing seething under the 
 surface. I'm wondering whether it's because Tango is not generally 
 discussed in the ng at all. I mean, it is developed and maintained 
 completely /outside/ of this ng environment. Is there some basis for 
 this notion? 

 
 People are simply opinionated. Programmers especially so.

I disagree. ;-)

Sean

BCS <ao pathlink.com> writes:

Reply to kris,

 There's recently been a couple of notable threads that I recall over
 Tango, which have been entirely non-constructive, and revolved almost
 entirely around small details such as module naming conventions.  It's
 like there's some kind of fear and loathing seething under the
 surface. I'm wondering whether it's because Tango is not generally
 discussed in the ng at all. I mean, it is developed and maintained
 completely /outside/ of this ng environment. Is there some basis for
 this notion?
 

digitalmars.d.tango ????

0ffh <frank frankhirsch.youknow.what.todo.net> writes:

BCS wrote:
 digitalmars.d.tango ????

++votes, splendid idea, old chap!
As the community grows larger, it would be good
to spread the communication over more channels.

regards, frank

Alix Pexton <_a_l_i_x_._p_e_x_t_o_n_ _g_m_a_i_l_._c_o_m_> writes:

Kris wrote:
 There's recently been a couple of notable threads that I recall over Tango, 
 which have been entirely non-constructive, and revolved almost entirely 
 around small details such as module naming conventions.  It's like there's 
 some kind of fear and loathing seething under the surface. I'm wondering 
 whether it's because Tango is not generally discussed in the ng at all. I 
 mean, it is developed and maintained completely /outside/ of this ng 
 environment. Is there some basis for this notion? 
 
 

To me, it seems that both D and Tango are developed with a similar air of
secrecy, widly discussed by those that are interested in them, both represented
by their respective authors, but the process of decision making vieled and
mysterious.

Occasionally there are announcements of a new version, even more occasionaly
hints of new features upcoming, but no insight into the process that has built
them.

Most are well recieved, and we all appreciate the effort that both parties put
in to their work, but...

I cannot recall a single occasion wen Walter has dismissed an issue that was
raised regarding the way that D works, he either welcomes the comments, offers
constuctive counter arguments, or stays frustratingly quiet and mysterious.

Genuine enquiries about why Tango is like it is seem always to be met with the
same few responces, "come to IRC/Our Forum", "well, you have a choice",
dismissal of the issue as trivial and sometimes what seem to be personal
remarks that have no baring on the issue.

When the feedback that people receive on the news groups is so blunt and
hostile, are you really surprised that people are reluctant to come to your
stomping grounds?

I can't help feeling some times that Tango's detractors are being bullied, and
having now been on IRC with you I know that is not the case.

The face that you tend to show on the NG is not the one that I saw last
night/this morning, but even this post seems to have a bullying tone to it.

It is obvious that the Tango developers all get along, and I can sense that
many of them have a similar trait to their personality, that of finding it
dificult to empathise with others, you do not have to accept or even understand
someone else's concerns before you can acknowlege them.

The threads that involve Tango do tend to become drawn out, and the hostility
is not entirely one sided, but the only reason that the are, as you say,
non-constructive, is because there seems to be a reluctance to even look at
issues from the other side's point of view.

The vast majority of Tango threads do not become debates because the Tango team
seem unwilling even to acknowledge that the NG is a place where people are
entitled to have a POV regarding Tango.

There are exceptions, but sadly, to my memory at least they are rare.

With a name like Tango you should have a slogan like "come dance with us", but
it seems more like "wanna fight?" at the moment.

A...

Sean Kelly <sean f4.ca> writes:

Alix Pexton wrote:
 Kris wrote:
 There's recently been a couple of notable threads that I recall over 
 Tango, which have been entirely non-constructive, and revolved almost 
 entirely around small details such as module naming conventions.  It's 
 like there's some kind of fear and loathing seething under the 
 surface. I'm wondering whether it's because Tango is not generally 
 discussed in the ng at all. I mean, it is developed and maintained 
 completely /outside/ of this ng environment. Is there some basis for 
 this notion?

 
 To me, it seems that both D and Tango are developed with a similar air 
 of secrecy, widly discussed by those that are interested in them, both 
 represented by their respective authors, but the process of decision 
 making vieled and mysterious.
 
 Occasionally there are announcements of a new version, even more 
 occasionaly hints of new features upcoming, but no insight into the 
 process that has built them.

I can see how some people may feel this way.  However, the bulk of 
discussion actually takes place on #d.tango, and in many cases is driven 
by user issues with the library.

 Genuine enquiries about why Tango is like it is seem always to be met 
 with the same few responces, "come to IRC/Our Forum", "well, you have a 
 choice", dismissal of the issue as trivial and sometimes what seem to be 
 personal remarks that have no baring on the issue.

For the "come to irc/our forum" issue, I think the goal there is simply 
to be able to discuss the issue in a more natural manner in the former 
case, and so as not to forget about it in the latter case.  Kris, Lars, 
or I could enter tickets ourselves for issues described here, but often 
we don't understand the request well enough provide sufficient detail. 
That, and we're all somewhat overworked.

 The threads that involve Tango do tend to become drawn out, and the 
 hostility is not entirely one sided, but the only reason that the are, 
 as you say, non-constructive, is because there seems to be a reluctance 
 to even look at issues from the other side's point of view.

I tend to avoid arguments on this newsgroup.  If that makes me seem 
unresponsive, I apologize.


Sean

Alix Pexton <_a_l_i_x_._p_e_x_t_o_n_ _g_m_a_i_l_._c_o_m_> writes:

Sean Kelly wrote:
 Alix Pexton wrote:
 Kris wrote:
 There's recently been a couple of notable threads that I recall over 
 Tango, which have been entirely non-constructive, and revolved almost 
 entirely around small details such as module naming conventions.  
 It's like there's some kind of fear and loathing seething under the 
 surface. I'm wondering whether it's because Tango is not generally 
 discussed in the ng at all. I mean, it is developed and maintained 
 completely /outside/ of this ng environment. Is there some basis for 
 this notion?

 To me, it seems that both D and Tango are developed with a similar air 
 of secrecy, widly discussed by those that are interested in them, both 
 represented by their respective authors, but the process of decision 
 making vieled and mysterious.

 Occasionally there are announcements of a new version, even more 
 occasionaly hints of new features upcoming, but no insight into the 
 process that has built them.

 
 I can see how some people may feel this way.  However, the bulk of 
 discussion actually takes place on #d.tango, and in many cases is driven 
 by user issues with the library.
 
 Genuine enquiries about why Tango is like it is seem always to be met 
 with the same few responces, "come to IRC/Our Forum", "well, you have 
 a choice", dismissal of the issue as trivial and sometimes what seem 
 to be personal remarks that have no baring on the issue.

 
 For the "come to irc/our forum" issue, I think the goal there is simply 
 to be able to discuss the issue in a more natural manner in the former 
 case, and so as not to forget about it in the latter case.  Kris, Lars, 
 or I could enter tickets ourselves for issues described here, but often 
 we don't understand the request well enough provide sufficient detail. 
 That, and we're all somewhat overworked.
 
 The threads that involve Tango do tend to become drawn out, and the 
 hostility is not entirely one sided, but the only reason that the are, 
 as you say, non-constructive, is because there seems to be a 
 reluctance to even look at issues from the other side's point of view.

 
 I tend to avoid arguments on this newsgroup.  If that makes me seem 
 unresponsive, I apologize.
 
 
 Sean

I prefer to be able to take my time and consider how I word my opinions and
views very carefully, this does not lend itself well to IRC. When one stops to
think there, oneis iften harried and poked...

I prefer unresponsive to argument, but I prefer debate to unresponsive, I don't
think this is a uncommon or unusual view.

A...

Bruce Adams <tortoise_74 yeah.who.co.uk> writes:

Alix Pexton Wrote:

 Kris wrote:
 There's recently been a couple of notable threads that I recall over Tango, 
 which have been entirely non-constructive, and revolved almost entirely 
 around small details such as module naming conventions.  It's like there's 
 some kind of fear and loathing seething under the surface. I'm wondering 
 whether it's because Tango is not generally discussed in the ng at all. I 
 mean, it is developed and maintained completely /outside/ of this ng 
 environment. Is there some basis for this notion? 
 
 

 
 To me, it seems that both D and Tango are developed with a similar air of
secrecy, widly discussed by those that are interested in them, both represented
by their respective authors, but the process of decision making vieled and
mysterious.

veiled ;) but agreed. It would be nice to know more about what's happening on
the const front for example. even if the forum were read only.
 
 Occasionally there are announcements of a new version, even more occasionaly
hints of new features upcoming, but no insight into the process that has built
them.
 
 Most are well recieved, and we all appreciate the effort that both parties put
in to their work, but...
 
 I cannot recall a single occasion wen Walter has dismissed an issue that was
raised regarding the way that D works, he either welcomes the comments, offers
constuctive counter arguments, or stays frustratingly quiet and mysterious.
 
 Genuine enquiries about why Tango is like it is seem always to be met with the
same few responces, "come to IRC/Our Forum", "well, you have a choice",
dismissal of the issue as trivial and sometimes what seem to be personal
remarks that have no baring on the issue.
 

I think one thing explains a significant fraction of the difference. Walter
probably reads almost every post here but unless he has a very specific
question or point to make he keeps quiet and lets everyone else duke it out.
The signal to noise ratio is much higher that way. It also lends him an aura of
respect aside from being the language designer. The signal to noise ratio here
has got beyond a joke. I can see why IRC would be preferred by people who like
to respond to absolutely every query and get to the bottom of things quickly
but on this kind of interface a more measured approach is usually better. I'm
being a bit of a hypocrite here as I stick my oar in way too much but I think
my point still stands.

Regards,

Bruce.

Tomas Lindquist Olsen <tomas famolsen.dk> writes:

I think it's a bad idea. If you really want to talk tango on these 
newsgroups, what is keeping you from it ?