3 ms·

This feels like "rust 2021 governance roadmap", which is good and all but not particularly interesting to those of us only peripherally involved. I'd be much m

by gpm 6y ago

This feels like "rust 2021 governance roadmap", which is good and all but not particularly interesting to those of us only peripherally involved. I'd be much more interested to see "rust 2021 language/development/... roadmap" - I sort of expect I will be seeing this soon.

nicoburns 6y ago
Yeah, it looks like the project has grown to the point where they're splitting the roadmaps out by team.
brundolf 6y ago
The impression I got is that they're taking a year to focus on governance instead of any dramatic technical efforts, in the wake of the Mozilla shake-up and the formation of the Foundation (and continuing project growth). I could be wrong. Edit: This was just speculation and people with better information have weighed in elsewhere
- steveklabnik 6y ago
  The core team is, yes, but that doesn't mean that improvements to other things won't happen. It's not like the compiler team will stop their work. But the core team is focusing on governance this year.
- brabel 6y ago
  Frankly, I hope you're right... Rust is an impressive language as it is... if it needs any improvement it's outside the language itself IMHO... all I can think of to complain about is compiler speed, really! The rest is really good stuff.
steveklabnik 6y ago
What you're seeing is the project's growth. We're big enough now that we can't talk meaningfully about everything the project does in one roadmap, and given that it's set by the core team, we're more formally delegating most of the specifics to the individual teams. Beyond that, this meta-work is really needed, for the project overall. We've been bumping into limits here for a while. Rust is now large enough that if it were a startup, some people would argue that it's no longer a startup. (I should also note the roadmaps have been trending this way for a while. See the change over time for yourself: * 2020: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/2857-roadmap-2020.md https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/2857-road... * 2019: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/2657-roadmap-2019.md https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/2657-road... * 2018: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/2314-roadmap-2018.md https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/2314-road... * 2017: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/1774-roadmap-2017.md https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/1774-road... We didn't do this before 2017.)
- cogman10 6y ago
  Is it fair to say that Mozilla's apparent step back from Rust is a major driver to needing to decide on future governance?
  - steveklabnik 6y ago
    Pretty much nothing to do with it, in the broad scheme of things. Mozilla was not directly involved in governance, and only employed a small number of people involved in project leadership, and those people didn't leave their positions when they left Mozilla. The closest thing to this is that the situation with Mozilla jumpstarted actually finally creating the Rust Foundation, and deciding its relationship to the project is a governance matter. But that's not in scope for this roadmap, and so has nothing directly to do with it.
maeln 6y ago
This is partly explained in the chapter unified project tracking [0]. In short: Too many Teams/Project and no current way to track them and their progress easily. It is something they want to address this year. [0] https://github.com/Mark-Simulacrum/rfcs/blob/roadmap-2021/text/0000-roadmap-2021.md#unified-project-tracking https://github.com/Mark-Simulacrum/rfcs/blob/roadmap-2021/te...
turbinerneiter 6y ago
I'm into rust 50% for language innovations and 50% for their work on open source governance models. Super important stuff.
lr1970 6y ago
> This feels like "rust 2021 governance roadmap", Please don't get me wrong -- governance is important. But concentrating on governance for the entirety of 2021 leaving technical roadmaps to the teams is surprising. What problems is this roadmap trying to solve? 1. Is the existing governance model inadequate and needs to be urgently fixed? 2. Is Rust becoming a "designed by committee" language? This model does not seem to work despite the best intentions. 3. It would be very useful to see not only "what" is in the roadmap but also "why". EDIT: formatting...

by gpm 6y ago

nicoburns 6y ago

Yeah, it looks like the project has grown to the point where they're splitting the roadmaps out by team.

brundolf 6y ago

The impression I got is that they're taking a year to focus on governance instead of any dramatic technical efforts, in the wake of the Mozilla shake-up and the formation of the Foundation (and continuing project growth). I could be wrong. Edit: This was just speculation and people with better information have weighed in elsewhere

steveklabnik 6y ago
The core team is, yes, but that doesn't mean that improvements to other things won't happen. It's not like the compiler team will stop their work. But the core team is focusing on governance this year.
brabel 6y ago
Frankly, I hope you're right... Rust is an impressive language as it is... if it needs any improvement it's outside the language itself IMHO... all I can think of to complain about is compiler speed, really! The rest is really good stuff.

steveklabnik 6y ago

What you're seeing is the project's growth. We're big enough now that we can't talk meaningfully about everything the project does in one roadmap, and given that it's set by the core team, we're more formally delegating most of the specifics to the individual teams. Beyond that, this meta-work is really needed, for the project overall. We've been bumping into limits here for a while. Rust is now large enough that if it were a startup, some people would argue that it's no longer a startup. (I should also note the roadmaps have been trending this way for a while. See the change over time for yourself: * 2020: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/2857-roadmap-2020.md https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/2857-road... * 2019: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/2657-roadmap-2019.md https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/2657-road... * 2018: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/2314-roadmap-2018.md https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/2314-road... * 2017: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/1774-roadmap-2017.md https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/1774-road... We didn't do this before 2017.)

cogman10 6y ago
Is it fair to say that Mozilla's apparent step back from Rust is a major driver to needing to decide on future governance?
- steveklabnik 6y ago
  Pretty much nothing to do with it, in the broad scheme of things. Mozilla was not directly involved in governance, and only employed a small number of people involved in project leadership, and those people didn't leave their positions when they left Mozilla. The closest thing to this is that the situation with Mozilla jumpstarted actually finally creating the Rust Foundation, and deciding its relationship to the project is a governance matter. But that's not in scope for this roadmap, and so has nothing directly to do with it.

maeln 6y ago

This is partly explained in the chapter unified project tracking [0]. In short: Too many Teams/Project and no current way to track them and their progress easily. It is something they want to address this year. [0] https://github.com/Mark-Simulacrum/rfcs/blob/roadmap-2021/text/0000-roadmap-2021.md#unified-project-tracking https://github.com/Mark-Simulacrum/rfcs/blob/roadmap-2021/te...

turbinerneiter 6y ago

I'm into rust 50% for language innovations and 50% for their work on open source governance models. Super important stuff.

lr1970 6y ago

> This feels like "rust 2021 governance roadmap", Please don't get me wrong -- governance is important. But concentrating on governance for the entirety of 2021 leaving technical roadmaps to the teams is surprising. What problems is this roadmap trying to solve? 1. Is the existing governance model inadequate and needs to be urgently fixed? 2. Is Rust becoming a "designed by committee" language? This model does not seem to work despite the best intentions. 3. It would be very useful to see not only "what" is in the roadmap but also "why". EDIT: formatting...