Reasons for Abandoning Nushell and Additional Feedback

5th chunk of `blog/2019-11-23-nushell-survey-results.md`

1aaa8b75204e994cb9ba550949ba6d5a85654fddf646e22200000001000004a7



For those folks who tried Nu, but decided it wasn't for them, we also gave them a chance to tell us why. Similarly to the previous question, "stability" and "time" were at the top of the list.

Digging in a bit further, it's not only that Nu itself is changing, but that the package ecosystem hadn't stayed up-to-date with Nu's releases, or didn't yet offer a package. This meant it was easy to not be able to keep up, even if they had time to.

Other topics that came up: needing better autocomplete, needing aliases, better scripting, support for Windows network drives, and improved documentation.

### Quotes

- _"It was interesting, but I have a pretty significant ecosystem built around my flows in Bash and Zsh I can't give up just yet. Maybe that's just something I need to work with."_
- _"Also the lack of documentation around the different commands is a major impediment."_
- _"Lack of middle-of-the-word completion, mostly. Also all the aliases I have defined that I’d need to port over."_

# Anything else we should know? (68 responses)

Title: Reasons for Abandoning Nushell and Additional Feedback

Summary

Former Nushell users cited instability and lack of time as key reasons for discontinuing use. The package ecosystem lagging behind Nushell releases and missing packages also contributed. Other issues included lacking autocomplete, aliases, scripting, Windows network drive support, and insufficient documentation. Overall, feedback was positive, with many encouraging the project to continue and expressing enthusiasm for the concept, and some feature requests for easy start guide and scripting.