4 ms·
Seems like a good tool for ensuring everyone is aligned. Nit: The policy document seems inconsistent in its authoritative tone. In some sections, it hand-waves
by withinrafael 2y ago
Seems like a good tool for ensuring everyone is aligned.
Nit: The policy document seems inconsistent in its authoritative tone. In some sections, it hand-waves and punts to an external resource. For example: "Yes, there are key kernel maintainers who support Rust in the kernel. [Check out this PDF of keynote slides and figure it out yourself]."
- okanat 2y agoYeah. This answer is weak. If they are really supportive, they need to put down their names.
- mecsred 2y agoI think the way it was handled is pretty reasonable considering it's a public facing statement. Putting your name down on an authoritative statement is an important commitment internally, but a name put down for any reason on a public statement is a magnet for a firehose of questions, controversy, and potentially harrassment.
- bityard 2y agoWould YOU want to be named (without permission) in a document like this as being responsible for something in a high-visibility project like the kernel just because you contributed some code, or gave a talk at a conference? Anyway, some slides at a conference are not the authoritative source for who works on Rust in the Linux kernel, something this is: grep -i rust MAINTAINERS
- layer8 2y agoThe question of who has the authority over the policies regarding the integration of Rust code into the kernel seems like a different question than who is maintaining Rust code.
- hitekker 2y agoYou’ve misunderstood the GP. He liked the post and offered one suggestion; your anger is misdirected.
- bityard 2y agoWhat anger?