I refuse to let Amazon define Rust

> And now they want to actually take Amazon's principles and claim that they're Rust's.

These just... literally... aren't Amazon's principles. At all. "The practice of coming up with pithy statements to guide decision-making" is the Amazon part.

> they've also taken steps to marginalize the core team. and some other dirty shit I won't say rn.

This sounds like the real concern, and it sounds really concerning, and I hope people come out to speak publicly and candidly about it. But it doesn't seem sensible to pretend that the making a list of adjectives is itself malign.

And there is no reason to believe that the growth would not have continued without Amazon's participation.

There's the simple fact that many major non Amazon companies are also supporting Rust, so I don't see how this is uniquely Amazon's contributions.

This argument appears akin to the original article's "Rustacean principles are based on Amazon tenets" BS.

Their website contains only anodyne director bios and board meeting minutes. The minutes go up to May's meeting, with most of the content omitted under a "Private Session" heading.

AIUI the main need for a foundation was so they could own the Rust domain names and trademarks. Eight months later, I've seen no announcement on whether any progress has been made with this.

* “Reliable: If it compiles, it works.”

* “Performant: Idiomatic code runs efficiently.”

* “Supportive: The language, tools, and community are here to help.”

* “Productive: A little effort does a lot of work.”

* “Transparent: You can predict and control low-level details.”

* “Versatile: You can do anything with Rust.”

I don't really see what the problem is. They aren't particularly Amazonian principles, and they all seem like good things to strive for.

My biggest complaint would be having Amazonians having control over feature roadmap and code acceptance. Amazon's priorities very often are in direct conflict with literally everyone else's priorities. Not to mention the fact that I've seen a lot of code at Amazon, know how nightmarish it is, and can reasonably infer that the internal politics at Amazon do not allow for, and often penalize, quality code. It is not at all unthinkable that some department with stupid priorities and lots of political clout pushes through some half-baked shit bonanza that will bite everyone else in the ass. That is a problem.