It has been almost 6 months, and these three topics haven't been implemented. It seemed that a few people were interested in #2 and #3.
"Seemed" is the right word. Annoying, isn't it, when too few people agree with one's priorities? :-)
Actually, it looks to me that there is some consensus. The table relations and the text time highlighting
seem to get thumbs up from a number of people.
There's that "seem" word again... :-) Well, sure. Thumbs up are easy. Why not? Yeah, sure I want that. Money for nothing and I don't have to work? You bet. Count me in. Thumbs up.
That is one way in which social media differs from reality. The thumbs up mechanism avoids contact with the real world where priority matters. On social media you can thumbs up to everything. In the real world, a thumbs up to everything means a thumbs up to nothing.
In the real world of 15,000 desires you get to pick which ones should be done first, which ones get done later and which ones not at all.
In the real world, there are two decisive factors:
1) He who pays the piper calls the tune. I picked an ancient phrase to underscore this rule is thousands of years old. Those who buy the product get a say in what gets done. Something that is required to generate many sales takes overwhelming priority over something that will generate no new sales.
2) Bang for the buck. All other things being equal, if a given engineering project can result in making ten desires happen that project will get prioritized ahead of the same effort being invested into a project that makes only one desire happen.
If anyone wants to vote in the above process, follow the tips in the Suggestionspage.
Occasionally even very sensible people, who know better than to think everyone must agree with them, are puzzled why something they suggested has not been done. For whatever reason, it seems odd that something they think is easy has not yet been done. Items 2 and 3 in Art's list are good candidates for that, especially considering how I personally would like them as well. :-)
But when you analyze them using the two decisive factors you see maybe that is not so puzzling: what sells more product is having a killer spatial SQL that is automatically parallel. That's a distinction. Syntax highlighting is nice to have, but not having it isn't going to stop anybody who needs a killer, parallel, spatial SQL from buying the product.
Likewise, the sort of person who has the skills to use a killer spatial SQL knows how to do what 8-style relations allow the less skilled to do.
I guess that's a key factor as well: if already there is a way to get what you want, then people tend to prioritize getting what they don't have at all ahead of an improvement in something that is already there but which could be more convenient.
But the above is pure speculation. If you really want to know why other people have suggested other things as priorities over what it is you personally advocate, you have to ask those people.
That's not so easy to do given that people will tell you what you want to hear on social media. You have to get out there and grind it out one interviewee at a time: "Well, OK. You gave me a thumbs up on the forum. Did you send in a letter? No? Why not?" or "Well, what did you actually write in that letter? Why did you ask for that instead of syntax highlighting? Oh, I see..."
My own feeling is that given the good taste in programming in our engineering staff that sooner or later there will be syntax highlighting even though virtually no customers give a hoot about that. It's just cool and something worth doing for our own taste. Likewise, 8 style relations, where there is some real interest, albeit not remotely as much as for really hot demands.