8 ms·

Good to see that he's still optimistic about Rust in the kernel. There was a small crowd when the drama was happening suggesting that Rust devs should just go w

Good to see that he's still optimistic about Rust in the kernel. There was a small crowd when the drama was happening suggesting that Rust devs should just go write their own Linux-compatible kernel somewhere else which I found... insane. It's better to iterate and improve existing systems IMO.

coldpie 2y ago
> There was a small crowd when the drama was happening suggesting that Rust devs should just go write their own Linux-compatible kernel somewhere else which I found... insane. One of the most important skills I found in open source development is separating technical arguments from religious arguments, and choosing to simply ignore the latter. You can spend all your time having the religious debates and feeling very productive while actually getting absolutely nothing done. Learning to recognize the distinction and, crucially, not engage at all when someone is coming at you with a religious argument is incredibly valuable for anyone who is or wants to be in a leadership-ish role in that kind of environment. You've got better things to do with your time than explain to someone why building a whole separate kernel is a stupid idea.
- mont_tag 2y ago
  "Not engaging at all" allows the engaging group to completely take over and expunge their opposition. The Python Software Foundation is an example. They have multiple former directors banned or resigning. They've defunded African Pycons that won't embrace certain ideologies. PSF employees and work group members are being purged of anyone not fully on board with the new ruling party. The discussion forums are censored and long-term contributors are afraid to post. In general, in democratic organizations it is a failing strategy to not engage in arguments or to boycott elections. It is a recipe for an imbalance that is almost impossible to correct later. So, I respectfully disagree with your suggestion to not engage at all.
  - lifty 2y ago
    Really curious, what ideology did the defunded African Pycons fail to embrace?
    - 01HNNWZ0MV43FF 2y ago
      It's often queer stuff that gets called "ideology" by it's opponents so I'm guessing it's this https://pythonafrica.blogspot.com/2023/12/an-open-letter-to-python-software_5.html?m=1 https://pythonafrica.blogspot.com/2023/12/an-open-letter-to-... > We understand that the argument against support for DjangoCon Africa was that the host country, Tanzania, is not a safe place for the LGBTQIA+ community. That's not as simple as "woke ideology" though. If you don't find the convention, Africa doesn't get a pycon. If you do fund it, you're funding something that excludes queer people. Without knowing any details, I guess they should have been more eager to fund it. then at least some people would benefit
      - AnonCoward42 2y ago
        [flagged]
        OKRainbowKid 2y ago
        If you consider the promotion of human rights and boycott of countries violating them an ideology, then this is an ideology I can get behind. Sure, you might not care about discrimination against queer people because you're not one of them, just like you might not care about racism against people of color because you're white - but just because it doesn't concern you directly doesn't mean discrimination isn't an issue.
        zarathustreal 2y ago
        All things in moderation, even, and especially, good things. Righteous fervor has killed more than disease and famine combined.
        ImJamal 2y ago
        According to Merriam Webster the definition of an ideology is one of the following > a manner or the content of thinking characteristic of an individual, group, or culture > the integrated assertions, theories and aims that constitute a sociopolitical program > a systematic body of concepts especially about human life or culture I am not sure how it could not be an ideology. Being against racism is an ideological idea as well.
  - 01HNNWZ0MV43FF 2y ago
    Agreed. And since I agree, I wonder what those "ideologies" were
    - mont_tag 2y ago
      It doesn't really matter. It could have been any contentious difference in strategic direction. The outcome would have been the same. People need to engage or face inevitable takeover and exclusion.
    - daedrdev 2y ago
      Tanzania has life imprisonment for homosexuality, surveys show it has 10% of its population tolerate queer people, and has been committing human rights abuses against the queer community for years as part of its authoritarianism. I think its fair to not run a pycon in a country that is explicitly extremely hostile and dangerous for a wide and respected portion of the python community.
  - llm_trw 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - inquirerGeneral 2y ago
      [dead]
  - roenxi 2y ago
    I think the original comment probably had an implicit [ignore isolated actors] as part of the context. Any organisation has to be wary of alternative mission statements overriding their actual mission statement and a failure to engage when that happens generally presages trouble.
    - coldpie 2y ago
      Indeed, and additionally, I was specifically talking about technical issues, not organizational issues. "Should we adopt this tech or not?" kind of stuff. Examples I'm sure we can all relate to: desktop environments, systemd, pulseaudio, programming languages, github/lab vs mailing lists. Lots of religious debates come up to separate out from legitimate technical concerns. Organizational issues are a whole other ballgame. I can see how my original comment was not specific enough about this.
  - giraffe_lady 2y ago
    "Certain idealogies" like communism or what? It's hard to understand what's at stake here if you're using euphemism like this. It sounds like there is conflict over a specific action or policy, what is it?
    - mont_tag 2y ago
      It's a broad conflict, not just a specific action. These blog posts give a flavor of what is going on: * https://ntoll.org/article/psf-woe/ https://ntoll.org/article/psf-woe/ * https://ntoll.org/article/victorian-python-allegory/ https://ntoll.org/article/victorian-python-allegory/ Sorry for using vague terminology. I don't personally keep up with PSF dramas. My point was about communities in general, not just the PSF in particular. To be fair, the dominant group itself also uses vague terminology. The PSF director's linked-in account says, "I'm motivated by the intersection of technology and social justice." Their social media accounts are more specific though: https://x.com/baconandcoconut?lang=en https://x.com/baconandcoconut?lang=en
      - jazzypants 2y ago
        It's hard to look at a situation from the outside, and I genuinely have no clue about the real situation in the Python community. All I know from those blog posts is that this guy has been bitterly claiming that he is going to leave the Python community for six years straight. If he doesn't like it so much, he should stop writing about it. I'm sorry, but I went into those blog posts with an open mind, and all I found was a long list of personal complaints with relatively few details about the actual situation.
- ptsneves 2y ago
  I disagree, to an extent as you created a dichotomy between tech and religious arguments. The truth is there is a spectrum, where a compiler error is a purely technical discussion. On the other hand of the spectrum are loosely related to tech like, "I need to see more from you before we tackle bigger changes". Open source is definitely very political and if you are not political you will find you will produce lots of technical output that will never be merged. There is also lots of etiquette that can go to using mailing list and patchset formatting to knowing who to ask to review. When you talk about design changes you better have credibility, as your design might not even be evaluated if you do not have a track record. I really disagree with your comment and in my experience with lots of OSS different projects i contributed to, i can tell you politics is equal or more important than raw technical competence the bigger the project is.
tmtvl 2y ago
It's way better to iterate and improve existing systems. But you need to do so in the context of those projects: in Linux when a maintainer wants to make a change to a system they are maintaining, they have to provide patches for other systems which are affected by the change. So if Rust lands in any section of the kernel, then the maintainers of related systems will either have to: A: never make any changes to the system they are maintaining, or B: learn Rust. Neither of those options seem reasonable, so it's a difficult problem. So if the contingent of people who want to see Rust in the kernel is large enough it may be better for them to fork the kernel, as it's unlikely that advocacy will have enough of an effect.
- xelamonster 2y ago
  It doesn't seem reasonable to expect a developer to learn a new programming language? Staying on top of constantly changing tools is part of the job.
  - ApolloFortyNine 2y ago
    They're doing it for free.
  - rightbyte 2y ago
    Why? Linux is 30 years old by now. When did they switch from g89 to a g11? Like last year or something. Imagine the churn if they would have changed their ways whenever there was some new hot thing. And this is applicable to most devs too.
    - xelamonster 2y ago
      I respect the conservative approach for the kernel but I think a big part of the disconnect on this is right there in the continued treatment of Rust as the "hot new thing" and yet another fad. To me it's much more than that. I might not have pushed back even a couple years ago but the language has been around nearly ten years now, has undeniable advantages (and disadvantages of course as with anything), and it's only gaining in popularity. Too much of the opposition feels like they're just hoping the movement fizzles out so they don't have to seriously engage with it, and I don't believe that's going to happen. Genuinely curious because I haven't been around so long, have there been previous pushes for the inclusion of other languages in the kernel? Anything even close to the level we're seeing now with Rust?
skyfaller 2y ago
While I'm not sure I agree with the arguments, I don't think the arguments for starting over from scratch are insane: https://drewdevault.com/2024/08/30/2024-08-30-Rust-in-Linux-revisited.html https://drewdevault.com/2024/08/30/2024-08-30-Rust-in-Linux-... The core argument is that attempts to convert the Linux kernel to Rust are burning out the people putting in that work. The choice might not be between Rust in Linux or a new kernel, but between burned out devs failing to put Rust in Linux or a new Linux-compatible kernel written from scratch in Rust.
- baq 2y ago
  There is no such thing as a Linux-compatible kernel. There's only Linux. Linux is not even compatible with itself, it's only compatible with its major version number. The argument may have been 'go pound sand', that's what it means.
  - sudobash1 2y ago
    I'd say that isn't true. The Linux version number is somewhat arbitrary, and does not denote incompatibility. And from the view of userspace, the Linux ABI is rather backwards compatible. Also, WSL1 and some BSDs are examples of Linux compatibility.
    - baq 2y ago
      Yes, the driver interface may or may not change, nobody knows where and when. That's a feature of the Linux versioning scheme and driver HAL policy. You can roll your own userspace-Linux-compatible kernel and it's going to be a toy until you develop drivers for it, which won't ever happen. > Also, WSL1 and some BSDs are examples of Linux compatibility. Yes, and they suffer from either performance or lack of drivers, hence WSL2 running a real Linux with some dark magic to share hardware and network, sort of. Surely you don't mean this as an argument in favor of rolling your own Linux-compatible kernel?
  - oldpersonintx 2y ago
    [dead]

coldpie 2y ago

> There was a small crowd when the drama was happening suggesting that Rust devs should just go write their own Linux-compatible kernel somewhere else which I found... insane. One of the most important skills I found in open source development is separating technical arguments from religious arguments, and choosing to simply ignore the latter. You can spend all your time having the religious debates and feeling very productive while actually getting absolutely nothing done. Learning to recognize the distinction and, crucially, not engage at all when someone is coming at you with a religious argument is incredibly valuable for anyone who is or wants to be in a leadership-ish role in that kind of environment. You've got better things to do with your time than explain to someone why building a whole separate kernel is a stupid idea.

mont_tag 2y ago
"Not engaging at all" allows the engaging group to completely take over and expunge their opposition. The Python Software Foundation is an example. They have multiple former directors banned or resigning. They've defunded African Pycons that won't embrace certain ideologies. PSF employees and work group members are being purged of anyone not fully on board with the new ruling party. The discussion forums are censored and long-term contributors are afraid to post. In general, in democratic organizations it is a failing strategy to not engage in arguments or to boycott elections. It is a recipe for an imbalance that is almost impossible to correct later. So, I respectfully disagree with your suggestion to not engage at all.
- lifty 2y ago
  Really curious, what ideology did the defunded African Pycons fail to embrace?
  - 01HNNWZ0MV43FF 2y ago
    It's often queer stuff that gets called "ideology" by it's opponents so I'm guessing it's this https://pythonafrica.blogspot.com/2023/12/an-open-letter-to-python-software_5.html?m=1 https://pythonafrica.blogspot.com/2023/12/an-open-letter-to-... > We understand that the argument against support for DjangoCon Africa was that the host country, Tanzania, is not a safe place for the LGBTQIA+ community. That's not as simple as "woke ideology" though. If you don't find the convention, Africa doesn't get a pycon. If you do fund it, you're funding something that excludes queer people. Without knowing any details, I guess they should have been more eager to fund it. then at least some people would benefit
    - AnonCoward42 2y ago
      [flagged]
      - OKRainbowKid 2y ago
        If you consider the promotion of human rights and boycott of countries violating them an ideology, then this is an ideology I can get behind. Sure, you might not care about discrimination against queer people because you're not one of them, just like you might not care about racism against people of color because you're white - but just because it doesn't concern you directly doesn't mean discrimination isn't an issue.
        zarathustreal 2y ago
        All things in moderation, even, and especially, good things. Righteous fervor has killed more than disease and famine combined.
        ImJamal 2y ago
        According to Merriam Webster the definition of an ideology is one of the following > a manner or the content of thinking characteristic of an individual, group, or culture > the integrated assertions, theories and aims that constitute a sociopolitical program > a systematic body of concepts especially about human life or culture I am not sure how it could not be an ideology. Being against racism is an ideological idea as well.
- 01HNNWZ0MV43FF 2y ago
  Agreed. And since I agree, I wonder what those "ideologies" were
  - mont_tag 2y ago
    It doesn't really matter. It could have been any contentious difference in strategic direction. The outcome would have been the same. People need to engage or face inevitable takeover and exclusion.
  - daedrdev 2y ago
    Tanzania has life imprisonment for homosexuality, surveys show it has 10% of its population tolerate queer people, and has been committing human rights abuses against the queer community for years as part of its authoritarianism. I think its fair to not run a pycon in a country that is explicitly extremely hostile and dangerous for a wide and respected portion of the python community.
- llm_trw 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - inquirerGeneral 2y ago
    [dead]
- roenxi 2y ago
  I think the original comment probably had an implicit [ignore isolated actors] as part of the context. Any organisation has to be wary of alternative mission statements overriding their actual mission statement and a failure to engage when that happens generally presages trouble.
  - coldpie 2y ago
    Indeed, and additionally, I was specifically talking about technical issues, not organizational issues. "Should we adopt this tech or not?" kind of stuff. Examples I'm sure we can all relate to: desktop environments, systemd, pulseaudio, programming languages, github/lab vs mailing lists. Lots of religious debates come up to separate out from legitimate technical concerns. Organizational issues are a whole other ballgame. I can see how my original comment was not specific enough about this.
- giraffe_lady 2y ago
  "Certain idealogies" like communism or what? It's hard to understand what's at stake here if you're using euphemism like this. It sounds like there is conflict over a specific action or policy, what is it?
  - mont_tag 2y ago
    It's a broad conflict, not just a specific action. These blog posts give a flavor of what is going on: * https://ntoll.org/article/psf-woe/ https://ntoll.org/article/psf-woe/ * https://ntoll.org/article/victorian-python-allegory/ https://ntoll.org/article/victorian-python-allegory/ Sorry for using vague terminology. I don't personally keep up with PSF dramas. My point was about communities in general, not just the PSF in particular. To be fair, the dominant group itself also uses vague terminology. The PSF director's linked-in account says, "I'm motivated by the intersection of technology and social justice." Their social media accounts are more specific though: https://x.com/baconandcoconut?lang=en https://x.com/baconandcoconut?lang=en
    - jazzypants 2y ago
      It's hard to look at a situation from the outside, and I genuinely have no clue about the real situation in the Python community. All I know from those blog posts is that this guy has been bitterly claiming that he is going to leave the Python community for six years straight. If he doesn't like it so much, he should stop writing about it. I'm sorry, but I went into those blog posts with an open mind, and all I found was a long list of personal complaints with relatively few details about the actual situation.
ptsneves 2y ago
I disagree, to an extent as you created a dichotomy between tech and religious arguments. The truth is there is a spectrum, where a compiler error is a purely technical discussion. On the other hand of the spectrum are loosely related to tech like, "I need to see more from you before we tackle bigger changes". Open source is definitely very political and if you are not political you will find you will produce lots of technical output that will never be merged. There is also lots of etiquette that can go to using mailing list and patchset formatting to knowing who to ask to review. When you talk about design changes you better have credibility, as your design might not even be evaluated if you do not have a track record. I really disagree with your comment and in my experience with lots of OSS different projects i contributed to, i can tell you politics is equal or more important than raw technical competence the bigger the project is.

tmtvl 2y ago

It's way better to iterate and improve existing systems. But you need to do so in the context of those projects: in Linux when a maintainer wants to make a change to a system they are maintaining, they have to provide patches for other systems which are affected by the change. So if Rust lands in any section of the kernel, then the maintainers of related systems will either have to: A: never make any changes to the system they are maintaining, or B: learn Rust. Neither of those options seem reasonable, so it's a difficult problem. So if the contingent of people who want to see Rust in the kernel is large enough it may be better for them to fork the kernel, as it's unlikely that advocacy will have enough of an effect.

xelamonster 2y ago
It doesn't seem reasonable to expect a developer to learn a new programming language? Staying on top of constantly changing tools is part of the job.
- ApolloFortyNine 2y ago
  They're doing it for free.
- rightbyte 2y ago
  Why? Linux is 30 years old by now. When did they switch from g89 to a g11? Like last year or something. Imagine the churn if they would have changed their ways whenever there was some new hot thing. And this is applicable to most devs too.
  - xelamonster 2y ago
    I respect the conservative approach for the kernel but I think a big part of the disconnect on this is right there in the continued treatment of Rust as the "hot new thing" and yet another fad. To me it's much more than that. I might not have pushed back even a couple years ago but the language has been around nearly ten years now, has undeniable advantages (and disadvantages of course as with anything), and it's only gaining in popularity. Too much of the opposition feels like they're just hoping the movement fizzles out so they don't have to seriously engage with it, and I don't believe that's going to happen. Genuinely curious because I haven't been around so long, have there been previous pushes for the inclusion of other languages in the kernel? Anything even close to the level we're seeing now with Rust?

skyfaller 2y ago

While I'm not sure I agree with the arguments, I don't think the arguments for starting over from scratch are insane: https://drewdevault.com/2024/08/30/2024-08-30-Rust-in-Linux-revisited.html https://drewdevault.com/2024/08/30/2024-08-30-Rust-in-Linux-... The core argument is that attempts to convert the Linux kernel to Rust are burning out the people putting in that work. The choice might not be between Rust in Linux or a new kernel, but between burned out devs failing to put Rust in Linux or a new Linux-compatible kernel written from scratch in Rust.

baq 2y ago
There is no such thing as a Linux-compatible kernel. There's only Linux. Linux is not even compatible with itself, it's only compatible with its major version number. The argument may have been 'go pound sand', that's what it means.
- sudobash1 2y ago
  I'd say that isn't true. The Linux version number is somewhat arbitrary, and does not denote incompatibility. And from the view of userspace, the Linux ABI is rather backwards compatible. Also, WSL1 and some BSDs are examples of Linux compatibility.
  - baq 2y ago
    Yes, the driver interface may or may not change, nobody knows where and when. That's a feature of the Linux versioning scheme and driver HAL policy. You can roll your own userspace-Linux-compatible kernel and it's going to be a toy until you develop drivers for it, which won't ever happen. > Also, WSL1 and some BSDs are examples of Linux compatibility. Yes, and they suffer from either performance or lack of drivers, hence WSL2 running a real Linux with some dark magic to share hardware and network, sort of. Surely you don't mean this as an argument in favor of rolling your own Linux-compatible kernel?
- oldpersonintx 2y ago
  [dead]