[jahsome]

This is pretty cool! I've had my eye on Wing for a while, as a avid fan of Pulumi. I was fortunate enough to have the freedom to use Pulumi in a past role, and it revolutionized the way I thought about infrastructure.

My current org has been slow to adopt IaC, and Bicep has been all for which I've managed to drum up appetite. I was surprised somewhat to enjoy the simplicity, but eventually I think we'll outgrow it. My hope is by the time we're ready to graduate, things like Wing, or radius will be more mature and easier to weave in.

On a side note, it feels disingenuous or at least inaccurate for a project to brand itself "new". I feel like I've seen this posted to hn a few times, how long will it be "new"? There's at least one 8-month old post.

The word "new" scares away certain types, who happen to be in leadership or decision-making roles.

[shaiber]

[I'm on the Wing team] Thanks for the feedback. We call it new because it is only a year old, and for programming languages its pretty young. It is just now getting mature enough to be able to build real world applications with. Hope it makes sense

[jahsome]

I understand your point, and I sincerely wasn't sniping. Since you took the time to reply, I'll share a little of my reasoning in case you might find it valuable.

I think using a subjective term is meaningless, at least in the context of an introduction. "New" is far too relative, and means something entirely different for one person to the next.

I personally think it makes more sense to provide an objective fact, such as "started in 2022" and let readers determine whether that qualifies as "new" or not.

I wouldn't have mentioned it, and may not have even noticed if it weren't literally the first piece of information presented to me in the repo.

In any case best of luck with the project. It looks very promising and I am excited to see where it goes!

[shaiber]

Thanks, and I agree with your reasoning, makes sense to provide objective data