=?UTF-8?Q?Darafei_=22Kom=D1=8Fpa=22_Praliaskouski?= <me@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