Good. This dev has explicitly said that he has non-technical reservations, and that he’ll abuse his position to get his view pushed through.
I hope they can keep themselves from doing the same for the rest of the systems they’re maintaining.
Because I am familiar with human behaviour.
Human behavior doesn’t dictate that a Linux kernel with failing Rust builds wouldn’t get published.
I’m not too familiar with Linux’s CI system but I assume they at least test that it compiles, even if it is disabled by default.
Yes, the systems would notice that something broke. Those systems have no say in whether something gets released.
Okay? And why are you imagining things would go down like that, when the policy is specifically not doing it this way? When this issue hasn’t occurred so far?
Rust is disabled by default, so it’s not like it would be harder to build a kernel when it’s broken. Seriously, I just don’t get why you’re imagining these things.
What’s there not to believe? If Rust gets broken, either someone will fix it, or the kernel releases with broken Rust. Where’s the issue?
It’s such a strange position to take.
I’m not trying to assign blame for Marcan’s burnout, but it’s important to try and understand what went wrong here, because things did go wrong. Linus’s earlier inaction (I haven’t seen anything about reaching out privately, could you link that?) isn’t the cause of it, but it’s what should have prevented things from going this far.
If we ignore what went wrong, the same thing will happen again.
Linus should have stepped in earlier. The R4L guys have been running against walls over and over (just look at how T’so, the “thin blue line” guy, spewed hate at that one conference), because individual developers think they can use their power to slow down the R4L project. They don’t argue on a technical level. Linus, as the project lead, has to step in when this happens, otherwise the experiment can’t work.
That now involves fixing Rust drivers, so you’re going to need to know Rust.
The R4L approach is that C maintainers never need to touch any Rust code. They can break it all day long without paying any attention to it. This has been an essential part of the project from the start, I don’t understand how people talking about this topic still don’t understand this.
And that’s why scoped styles are a godsend!
Global styles were simply always a terrible idea.
Nobody asked for the code to be maintained by DMA. The maintainer blocked a PR outside his subsystem, and even if it was part of his subsystem, the R4L approach is that C developers can break Rust code however they want.
Literally nobody suggested that the DMA maintainers should maintain Rust code.
If I were a maintainer in that position I’d be barring the doors too. It’s not a driver for some esoteric realtek wireless card or something.
This effectively kills R4L. If they can’t include Rust Interfaces for important subsystems, each driver written in Rust that uses these subsystems has to separately track all the Subsystem Interfaces, leading to lots of extra work for no benefit.
If this is the approach Linux takes, they should just cancel R4L completely.
This creates a lot of extra work for no benefit, as every driver that needs DMA would have to include their own copy of the DMA stuff.
Not just that, it’s the reason why it doesn’t need semicolons: https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/JavaScript/Automatic_semicolon_insertion
*bonk* go to firejail
Oh boy, are you gonna LOVE Javascript
It obviously offers advantages since it’s an ordinal scale. Why would you pretend it doesn’t. How did the names hurt you?
Okay? Not sure what you’re on about. Somehow only LTS versions count for you, yet those are also not okay because updates are published over time?
I don’t understand your issue.
What do you mean? Every Ubuntu version name starts with the next letter: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Releases
And I’m not sure what you mean with tracking releases, could you rephrase?
Hm… Has anyone ever suggested they just do both? Wouldn’t that be amazing.
Though I would prefer a naming scheme like Ubuntu, with the first letter incrementing. That would be more useful than the current names.
Once, my Slack account was deleted due to an error in an automated system, along with everything else, while I was at lunch. That was fun. But not as fun as the 6 months it took until all access was mostly restored.