[fpc-pascal] Fwd: What to do to get new users

[Martin Frb]

On 19/10/2024 10:35, Michael Van Canneyt via fpc-pascal wrote:
>
> On Fri, 18 Oct 2024, Hairy Pixels via fpc-pascal wrote:
>>
>> You just only adopt it when you want it or in new programs entirely.
>> Remember we’re talking about new users with no programs wanting to start
>> fresh.
>
> You are not taking the reasoning to its logical conclusion.
>
> These "new users" will want to have some standard library - the RTL and
> packages.
>
> So the whole rtl/packages needs to be recreated if you introduce this,
> for the reasons that were mentioned by Sven. Reasons that were already 
> voiced 20 years ago, by the way.
>
> You are in effect redesigning the language, and inescapably need to 
> redesign the rtl/packages as well. With all the backwards 
> compatibility issues added
> on top, because we do not have the manpower to maintain 2 RTLs.

Which IMHO, means another (potentially drastic) downside.

If it would be possible and would be done, you end up with 2 
incompatible products. That would mean you split the community into 2 
groups, each group smaller than the current. Effectively immediately 
downsizing the amount of users (in each group).
Even if you gain 20% new users (and I find that more than optimistic, I 
would guess more like 5% tops, if we are lucky), and then split unevenly 
60/40 => the larger of the 2 new communities will be at 70% of the 
current size.

The amount of sample code will be split, and not only that, but similar 
looking samples will be all over the place, but wont work, often even 
crash, because they are for the "other fpc". Users will give up on 
examples, because they don't work.

IMHO, this is a sure way of harming the project.

Of course, that said, I can not predict the future. Anyone may think 
entirely different. Anyone may assume completely different numbers.
Oh, I am sure there will be someone promising a much bigger amount of 
new users to come from that. Well, while I can't predict the future, I 
can learn from the past. Such promises have been around for a long time, 
and whenever (99% of cases) by coincidence the requested feature was 
added, the promise has not been fulfilled.