=?UTF-8?Q?Darafei_=22Kom=D1=8Fpa=22_Praliaskouski?= <m...@komzpa.net> writes: >> The above is all about getting the build system to work at all. If that >> isn't a showstopper there's a subsequent discussion to be had about older >> platforms where one could get the build system to work but convenient >> packages are missing. ...
> I would expect that a new version of software should not target versions of > platform that are end of full support. The other side of that argument is that allowing a build system we haven't even adopted yet to dictate which platforms we can support is definitely letting the tail wag the dog. My gut reaction to Catalin's list is that requiring C+11 is a pretty darn high bar to clear for older platforms. I have a positive impression of python's portability, so requiring a recent python version might not be too awful ... but then requiring ninja pretty much tosses away the advantage again. So, while in principle you could probably get these toolchains going on an old platform, the reality is that moving to either will amount to "we're desupporting everything that wasn't released in this decade". That's a pretty big shift from the project's traditional mindset. It's possible that our users wouldn't care; I don't know. But to me it's a significant minus that we'd have to set against whatever pluses are claimed for a move. regards, tom lane