On May 17, 2018 7:44:44 PM PDT, Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: >On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 12:32:39AM +0200, Catalin Iacob wrote: >> I do have a real concern about the long term attractiveness of the >> project to new developers, especially younger ones as time passes. >> It's not a secret that people will just avoid creaky old projects, >and >> for Postgres old out of fashion things do add up: autoconf, raw make, >> Perl for tests, C89, old platform support. I have no doubt that the >> project is already loosing competent potential developers due to >this. >> One can say this is superficial and those developers should look at >> the important things but that does not change reality that some will >> just say pass because of dislike of the old technologies I mentioned. >> Personally, I can say that if the project were still in CVS I would >> probably not bother as I just don't have energy to learn an inferior >> old version control system especially as I see version control as >> fundamental to a developer. I don't feel the balance between >> recruiting new developers and end user benefits tilted enough to >> replace the build system but maybe in some years that will be the >> case. > >What percentage of our adoption decline from new developers is based on >our build system, and how much of it is based on the fact we use the C >language?
I think neither is as strong a factor as our weird procedures and slow review. People are used to github pull requests, working bug trackers, etc. I do think that using more modern C or a reasonable subset of C++would make things easier. Don't think there's really an alternative there quite yet. Andres Andres -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
