3 ms·
Yes, it's really false. They weren't saying that maintainers couldn't change the API nor that the maintainers who changed the API had to update the Rust part, j
by entropicdrifter 2y ago
Yes, it's really false. They weren't saying that maintainers couldn't change the API nor that the maintainers who changed the API had to update the Rust part, just that they needed to tell the Rust maintainers what they did and what they intended so that they could correctly encode their underlying assumptions in code.
In other words, they simply requested adequate documentation and the response was "I'M NOT LEARNING RUST AND YOU CAN'T MAKE ME", effectively. That is nontechnical nonsense
- MiguelX413 2y agoThe religion known as C-ism is sabotaging Linux.
- an_guy 2y ago> They weren't saying that maintainers couldn't change the API nor that the maintainers who changed the API had to update the Rust part So maintainer would have to either wait for Rust team to update their API or learn Rust. Seems like an unnecessary dependency.
- sunshowers 2y agoYes, the burden on the C maintainers is low but not zero. In a shared project, other people matter too. If you don't like it you should just work on solo projects.