(I'm one of the people from the thread) Although this issue has degraded into a conversation at this point, which is a bit unfortunate and honestly my fault, I

(I'm one of the people from the thread) Although this issue has degraded into a conversation at this point, which is a bit unfortunate and honestly my fault, I feel it's important to mention that the main contributors here (myself, other Zig devs, Andrew Kelley, and others) all know each-other, have either met in person or online, etc. and I believe are all just trying to improve the status quo. There isn't any decision on "should we drop mingw or not" because we don't actually know what that would look like at all, and that's not really what the issue is about. Better phrased the title would be "Issues with libc headers Zig ships on Windows" Most importantly, our goal is just to improve the status quo of C/C++ dev not just drop mingw out of some philosophical reasoning. If Zig takes on that burden, there needs to be super solid reasoning behind it and it would require some serious investment. If you read Andrew's messages closely, you'll see that is what he is really reiterating constantly. I don't think anybody in that thread is really opposed to closing the issue and saying we just need to improve/contribute back to MinGW, Wine, etc. In fact, that's the current status quo and thus far, I would say, the most reasonable approach. It's cool that these conversations are happening with some momentum, though. I'm not aware of many other places where people are actively discussing improving the status quo of Windows C/C++ development.