4 ms·

'Core team' as a concept naturally leads to elitism.

choeger 5y ago
Does it? I am not familiar with the Rust language development but I read it as "team that takes care of the core (of the language)".
- everybodyknows 5y ago
  Equally well read as "all others are non-essential" -- tantamount to "subordinate". Guaranteed to seed resentments among those outside the "core". The social fix would be to change the name "Core" to "Base Language" or some such. Perhaps fork off a separate "Ecosystem" committee with broader representation. Bona fide: Was once myself on the other side of a "Core" team boundary.
- capableweb 5y ago
  Well, you either have a explicit hierarchy of people working on something, and then the people who are a part of the "top layer" can sometimes start to look down on the ones who belong to the layer below, seeing them as less knowledgeable or not producing useful output. Sometimes that leads to people starting to close down into their current layer, and forms "us-vs-them" groups. Or, you have a implicit hierarchy and basically the same thing happen but the layers don't have names.
  - dboreham 5y ago
    This is what humans do.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
  - maydup-nem 5y ago
    > "top layer" can sometimes start to look down on the ones who belong to the layer below, seeing them as less knowledgeable or not producing useful output So? Are you going to blame them for seeing the reality as it truly is?
- iso8859-1 5y ago
  What is the core of a language? Is it the specification? (excluding the standard library?) Is it the compiler frontend or the backend? Or both?
- nvrspyx 5y ago
  From the website[0]: > Managing the overall direction of Rust, subteam leadership, and any cross-cutting issues This sounds to be more of an "executive team", but I am also unfamiliar with Rust development, so I don't know how accurate that is in practice. 0: https://www.rust-lang.org/governance/teams/core https://www.rust-lang.org/governance/teams/core
- tester34 5y ago
  When it comes to naming, then from time to time I tend to look at C# and I got impression that there are: "Language Design Team" "Compiler/Roslyn Team(?)" "CLR Team(?)" yada yada so more product/role-driven naming schema
- crate_barre 5y ago
  Have you talked to people that evangelize Rust? The whole community is elitist, starts at the top I guess.
maydup-nem 5y ago
> elitism You are saying it like as if it were something bad.
MrBuddyCasino 5y ago
Almost anything in the real world that works and is not dysfunctional is built on hierarchies. Where hierarchies are not explicitly spelled out they are implicit and without accountability - "some animals are more equal than others". How to promote on merit and not nepotism or corruption is the hard problem.
- fijiaarone 5y ago
  Do you want a competence hierarchy or a political hierarchy? That's the question our society is facing.
  - pornel 5y ago
    Thinking they can be separated long term is very naive. First, competence itself is subjective and hard to measure, especially for the very broad task of language design and stewardship. Which skills and credentials are considered most relevant and who's judging them is already "political" (e.g. do "hackers" get stuff done, or are winging it? Is someone with a PhD in PLT the most qualified, or an ivory-tower academic?) Then there are human factors. Programmers aren't deterministic stateless coffee2code transformers. Some people will dislike other people, for a broad range of reasons that may be valid or not, and that will affect their judgement. Also many projects and companies have to deal with "asshole geniuses". It's very "political" to decide whether you kick out someone who writes good code, but scares away other contributors. "Corporate politics" is not thing set up on purpose, but it's a meta-game that emerges even in organizations that are supposed to be purely meritocratic. There are people who will consciously play this game, and have an advantage over people who naively think the game doesn't exist (I'm not endorsing it, but saying it's a phenomenon that orgs need to be aware of and actively deal with instead of declaring they're apolitical).
Bayart 5y ago
It also leads to getting things done.

Does it? I am not familiar with the Rust language development but I read it as "team that takes care of the core (of the language)".

everybodyknows 5y ago
Equally well read as "all others are non-essential" -- tantamount to "subordinate". Guaranteed to seed resentments among those outside the "core". The social fix would be to change the name "Core" to "Base Language" or some such. Perhaps fork off a separate "Ecosystem" committee with broader representation. Bona fide: Was once myself on the other side of a "Core" team boundary.
capableweb 5y ago
Well, you either have a explicit hierarchy of people working on something, and then the people who are a part of the "top layer" can sometimes start to look down on the ones who belong to the layer below, seeing them as less knowledgeable or not producing useful output. Sometimes that leads to people starting to close down into their current layer, and forms "us-vs-them" groups. Or, you have a implicit hierarchy and basically the same thing happen but the layers don't have names.
- dboreham 5y ago
  This is what humans do.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
- maydup-nem 5y ago
  > "top layer" can sometimes start to look down on the ones who belong to the layer below, seeing them as less knowledgeable or not producing useful output So? Are you going to blame them for seeing the reality as it truly is?
iso8859-1 5y ago
What is the core of a language? Is it the specification? (excluding the standard library?) Is it the compiler frontend or the backend? Or both?
nvrspyx 5y ago
From the website[0]: > Managing the overall direction of Rust, subteam leadership, and any cross-cutting issues This sounds to be more of an "executive team", but I am also unfamiliar with Rust development, so I don't know how accurate that is in practice. 0: https://www.rust-lang.org/governance/teams/core https://www.rust-lang.org/governance/teams/core
tester34 5y ago
When it comes to naming, then from time to time I tend to look at C# and I got impression that there are: "Language Design Team" "Compiler/Roslyn Team(?)" "CLR Team(?)" yada yada so more product/role-driven naming schema
crate_barre 5y ago
Have you talked to people that evangelize Rust? The whole community is elitist, starts at the top I guess.

maydup-nem 5y ago

> elitism You are saying it like as if it were something bad.

MrBuddyCasino 5y ago

Almost anything in the real world that works and is not dysfunctional is built on hierarchies. Where hierarchies are not explicitly spelled out they are implicit and without accountability - "some animals are more equal than others". How to promote on merit and not nepotism or corruption is the hard problem.

fijiaarone 5y ago
Do you want a competence hierarchy or a political hierarchy? That's the question our society is facing.
- pornel 5y ago
  Thinking they can be separated long term is very naive. First, competence itself is subjective and hard to measure, especially for the very broad task of language design and stewardship. Which skills and credentials are considered most relevant and who's judging them is already "political" (e.g. do "hackers" get stuff done, or are winging it? Is someone with a PhD in PLT the most qualified, or an ivory-tower academic?) Then there are human factors. Programmers aren't deterministic stateless coffee2code transformers. Some people will dislike other people, for a broad range of reasons that may be valid or not, and that will affect their judgement. Also many projects and companies have to deal with "asshole geniuses". It's very "political" to decide whether you kick out someone who writes good code, but scares away other contributors. "Corporate politics" is not thing set up on purpose, but it's a meta-game that emerges even in organizations that are supposed to be purely meritocratic. There are people who will consciously play this game, and have an advantage over people who naively think the game doesn't exist (I'm not endorsing it, but saying it's a phenomenon that orgs need to be aware of and actively deal with instead of declaring they're apolitical).

Bayart 5y ago

It also leads to getting things done.