3 ms·

You seem to think of "rust enthusiasts" as some organized group with a goal of writing Rust for the sake of it. Rust is long past such extremely early adopter

by pornel 1y ago

You seem to think of "rust enthusiasts" as some organized group with a goal of writing Rust for the sake of it. Rust is long past such extremely early adopter phase. What you're seeing now is developers who are interested in writing a better version of whatever they're already working on, and they're choosing Rust to do it. It's not a group "Rust enthusiasts" ninjas infiltrating projects. It's more and more developers everywhere adopting Rust as a tool to get their job done, not to play language wars.

richard_todd 1y ago
Nah, I called out redox and another commenter pointed out ripgrep as an even better example of what I’d prefer to see, and those are also by what I would call rust enthusiasts. I don’t think of them as a monolithic group. Where we disagree is I would not call injecting rust into an established project “writing a better version”. I would love it if they did write a better version, so we could witness its advantages before switching to it.
- dralley 1y ago
  They are referring to adopting the Sequoia PGP library, which is written in Rust. There are plenty of benefits to using Sequoia which you can investigate now, no need to theoretically wait for the integration to happen. Not coincidentally, the RPM package manager also adopted Sequoia PGP.
  - richard_todd 1y ago
    First off, the mail references far more rust adoption than just Sequoia, but since you bring it up: here is how RPM adopted Sequoia in Fedora-land. There was a proposal, a discussion with developers about the ramifications (including discussion about making sure the RPMs built on all architectures), and there were votes and approvals. Costs and benefits and alternatives were analyzed. Here's a page that has links to the various votes and discussion: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/RpmSequoia https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/RpmSequoia Can't you see how much more thought and care went into this, than is on display in this Debian email (the "if your architecture is not supported in 6 months then your port is dead" email)?
    - dralley 1y ago
      > (including discussion about making sure the RPMs built on all architectures) All officially supported ones. The Debian discussion is not about officially supported Debian ports, it's about unofficial ones.

by pornel 1y ago

richard_todd 1y ago

Nah, I called out redox and another commenter pointed out ripgrep as an even better example of what I’d prefer to see, and those are also by what I would call rust enthusiasts. I don’t think of them as a monolithic group. Where we disagree is I would not call injecting rust into an established project “writing a better version”. I would love it if they did write a better version, so we could witness its advantages before switching to it.

dralley 1y ago
They are referring to adopting the Sequoia PGP library, which is written in Rust. There are plenty of benefits to using Sequoia which you can investigate now, no need to theoretically wait for the integration to happen. Not coincidentally, the RPM package manager also adopted Sequoia PGP.
- richard_todd 1y ago
  First off, the mail references far more rust adoption than just Sequoia, but since you bring it up: here is how RPM adopted Sequoia in Fedora-land. There was a proposal, a discussion with developers about the ramifications (including discussion about making sure the RPMs built on all architectures), and there were votes and approvals. Costs and benefits and alternatives were analyzed. Here's a page that has links to the various votes and discussion: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/RpmSequoia https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/RpmSequoia Can't you see how much more thought and care went into this, than is on display in this Debian email (the "if your architecture is not supported in 6 months then your port is dead" email)?
  - dralley 1y ago
    > (including discussion about making sure the RPMs built on all architectures) All officially supported ones. The Debian discussion is not about officially supported Debian ports, it's about unofficial ones.