[swift-evolution] [Pre-Proposal-Discussion] Union Type - Swift 4
neubauer at kingsware.de
Thu Aug 11 10:11:31 CDT 2016
> Am 11.08.2016 um 16:52 schrieb Cao, Jiannan via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org>:
> Some ones proposal have always been accepted very quickly even though it is not fully discussed.
> I don't know why.
> so if some one always focus on swift-evolution then it has more priority to proposal?
> What about others?
> I proposal this since February, May. no one said it is a problem. But in June, some one lead an idea of & and union type proposal has been listed in not-welcomed proposal for Swift 3. No one notify me that discussion and no one discussed that with me. I try to discuss with the core team but they have no response before June. But After June, they said it is not for Swift 3. OK, I proposed for Swift 4, and get a shit response.
> Email list let proposal topic hide themselves?
> No direct answer of my Feb, May proposal, but a June discussed sometime somewhere I don't know.
> so I make a proposal, and this is the result.
In parts I can understand your frustration although your kind of reaction cuts everybody’s slack, because it is well behind rules of politeness/netiquette whatever. I think it is „normal“ that more active members that have provided good input already get automatically some bonus, even if it was not intended. Its just human.
I am quite new here and tried to add some value to discussions where I have confidence and I had the slight feeling that sometimes people that are more involved in the evolution process take a quick, vague look at my text and answer with some very generic and devastating commentary. This can be frustrating, but still it is a normal thing.
In Kotlin’s evolution process they use different media for different stadium of discussion (which has been proposed here too) and for each stadium they start to introduce a given process (the procedure is work in progress). Currently, there it is like this:
* discuss on Slack to get a feeling whether community gives some response (nobody expects that you look back for months in that history)
* create an issue in their issue tracker for further discussions
* if you get a *go* from the core team create a proposal (with a very similar format as the proposals have here) and create a pull request
* after some discussion you may either abandon your proposal or try to get a so called „shepherd“ from the core team
* from now on the shepherd guides the discussion
I didn’t get further than this yet, so I don’t know whether they have a community voting procedure, but it would be a nice addition.
Perhaps such a more guided (and comprehensible) procedure would help to keep track and make the process more fair (since the goal is to make swift better not to support personal self-affirmation like e.g. the german wikipedia administrators do).
All the best
> 在 2016年8月11日，21:42，Wallacy <wallacyf at gmail.com> 写道：
>> You don't need to act like a jerk. It's really difficult ask to you follow the past discussions?
>> Compositions type are "generally" well accepted for this community, but has some problems to be solved first.
>> Em qui, 11 de ago de 2016 às 02:53, Cao, Jiannan via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> escreveu:
>> OK. I'll shut up since I waste your time.
>> At 2016-08-11 13:41:59, "Chris Lattner" <clattner at apple.com> wrote:
>> You’re certainly welcome to your opinion.
>> Swift is not Typescript, and this topic has been discussed extensively in the past. We expect you to familiarize yourself with those discussions. Otherwise, it is just a waste of people’s time to rehash old arguments.
>>> On Aug 10, 2016, at 10:22 PM, Cao, Jiannan <frogcjn at 163.com> wrote:
>>> Swift evolution seems not an evolution.
>>> I'll leave this mail list since this is not a good proposal environment. Typescript and other language community is more open to new idea. Swift-evolution is just a weird community.
>>> 在 2016-08-11 13:18:54，"Chris Lattner" <clattner at apple.com> 写道：
>>>> On Aug 10, 2016, at 8:15 PM, Xiaodi Wu via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
>>>> I don't know if the core team feels differently now with respect to Swift 4, but union types are listed as a "commonly rejected change":
>>> There is no change in opinion here. This topic is also out of scope for Swift 4 stage 1 in any case.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 496 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
More information about the swift-evolution