Re: Revitalization

From: Niall Douglas (s_sourceforge_at_[hidden])
Date: 2022-12-04 14:22:04

On 03/12/2022 02:02, David Sankel via Boost wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> At C++Now this year I gave a talk on the status of Boost and presented
 this
> graph which illustrated the trend of Boost mailing list participation.
> 
>
 https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1ocX8Dh4B98gxfXJTWOriaEU1tmJN61M4RfjUHoqLsK8/edit#slide=id.g11b878c1600_1_38
> 
> I'm interested to hear your opinions as to what happened over that time
> period to cause such a trend. There's truth to the claim that this
 question
> is being asked of the wrong people; those who left, stopped participating,
> or would otherwise start probably have good insight. Nevertheless, I think
> it would be interesting for us to brainstorm on this.

I presented a graph I think at C++ Now 2015 with the exact same trend. 
Apart from the year in which the design of Outcome was discussed here, 
mailing list volume continues its trend line downwards.

I mention that Outcome review year, because it shows that if there is 
something interesting to discuss here, people do discuss it here and 
they come from elsewhere to here to read the discussion. People will 
link to discussion threads from social media, and from other languages. 
I remember links to Boost mailing list discussion points on Outcome 
being linked to from Rust, Python and other programming language 
communities, not just from within C++.

Back in the day when I had time to donate, my solution to creating more 
interesting things to discuss here was to set up a pipeline of new young 
developers coming into Boost and sometimes C++ using Google Summer of 
Code. I think that was quite successful, we got a few new libraries out 
of it, and some new young developer talent into C++ as an ecosystem.

I've always been of the belief that successfully ingressing new young 
developers is the best way to revitalising any mature ecosystem. Not 
necessarily because the old timers are out of ideas, but they are 
usually extremely time pressed in a way younger developers are not. 
Also, contributions of new big stuff to open source particularly 
benefits the career of a younger dev in a way it doesn't for an older 
dev - most of those Google Summer of Code young devs immediately stepped 
into a six figure income after I wrote them a glowing reference based on 
their participation in the Boost SoC, and that's huge for them in a way 
it can't be for older devs. So they've got a bigger incentive to invest 
their free time in a way few old timers can rationalise.

It requires sustained effort to bring new devs into C++. It isn't 
exactly cool nor sexy like say Rust is, so they don't ingress on their 
own anything like as quickly as if they are proactively nurtured in. So 
if you want revitalisation, that needs constant daily work to nurture 
and bring forth new talent, and all the drudgery that entails.

Niall