3 ms·
As an end-run around the trademark policy in the iceweasel style, crablang is useless. You can already use rust without being in violation of the trademark poli
by Xylakant 3y ago
As an end-run around the trademark policy in the iceweasel style, crablang is useless. You can already use rust without being in violation of the trademark policy - you just can’t name your project rust-foo or call your compiler rusty unless it’s actually rustc. Crablang doesn’t change anything about that.
The iceweasel situation is different AFAIR - Mozilla (IMHO reasonably) wants binaries that are called Firefox to be unmodified Firefox to avoid confusion, bug reports etc. Debian didn’t want to respect that policy and this decided to fork and patch, renaming the project to comply with the policy. You can do the same for rust, but that’s not what crablang does, at least now.
- electroly 3y ago> you just can’t name your project rust-foo or call your compiler rusty unless it’s actually rustc. Crablang doesn’t change anything about that. My understanding is the intention is that you can call your project crab-foo or your compiler crabby and be sure that nobody from Crab is going to get upset at you. You had that choice before, too, but now they've come up with a common name for everyone to share.
- Xylakant 3y agoSure, but the crab trademark is worthless. And you wouldn't need to fork the compiler to do that. The community, if it wished, could have formally or informally adopted <crab->foo as a naming scheme.