Is this about Amazon employing most of the core team and having too much influence on the language ?
I remember someone else high up in the Rust project leaving due to those reasons last month.
Rust Moderation Team Resigns
191–200 of 912 posts
Re: Rust Moderation Team Resigns
#192Re: Rust Moderation Team Resigns
#193Earlier quoted context omitted.
In my personal experience such statements are actually not rare among specific minorities, and only in spaces between those minorities. They will never be said in a public way, because it makes them targets. I've been pulled aside by fellow minorities and warned against communities I had expressed interest in in the past, always in private in confidential spaces.
But what you're saying is that people will disagree about what communities are "toxic and non-serious". I might think that, e.g. much of the blockchain space easily matches that sort of description, but it would be harder to say whether that's a majority or minority viewpoint.
The fact that people disagree is a reason to not have moderation... why?
Re: Rust Moderation Team Resigns
#194Earlier quoted context omitted.
Absolutely, yes. A growing community needs healthy management in order to avoid reputational damage to the core language. There's no shortage of guidance to "stay away from X tech because the community is toxic and non-serious"
In my personal experience such statements are pretty rare actually.
Oh, I think they are not as rare as you think. People are actively deterred from, say, Linux kernel development because of the community.
Re: Rust Moderation Team Resigns
#195Is this a dirty trick by the amazon folks to harm the core team?
At this point, it seems like Amazon running the show would bring some stability to what looks like a shitshow.
Re: Rust Moderation Team Resigns
#196Earlier quoted context omitted.
it's very similar to working in a corporation and seeing someone get fired. the company is bound by legal concerns to not reveal why the person was fired, which leaves everyone else wondering if the person had done something fireable or if the company was playing politics with power. i've heard netflix does things a bit differently. when people are asked to leave, their manager sends an email out to everyone explaini…
> the company is bound by legal concerns to not reveal why the person was fired I think this is a fairly common misconception. While you might sign an anti disparagement agreement when you were hired, those tend to be one-way and designed to protect the company. And the bar to prove a defamation case is extremely high . AIUI, most employers simply do not disclose details on firings as a matter of policy, not law.
You're correct in that there is no law saying that employers are prohibited from disclosing why a person was fired. But the policies are a result of laws that could open them up to legal action if they were to disclose any specifics. However unlikely that legal action may be, and probably even more unlikely to succeed, they still gain nothing from any such disclosures so it makes perfect sense to prohibit them.
Re: Rust Moderation Team Resigns
#197I love Rust. Its the language I use most these days. But seems like there is a new drama every week with the core team and community.
> But seems like there is a new drama every week That's what happens when you elevate micromanagement of language to a task of equal or greater importance than the creation of code.
What a strange way of looking at it. At any functioning company, toxic employees get fired because the cost of them pushing out other employees is usually higher than the cost of firing them. Open source projects do not hire and fire people but do have the ability to censure toxic contributors.
I know nothing about this particular case, but the general idea of moderating contributors to a project is not wacky as you seem to believe and predates the existence of distributed open source development.
Re: Rust Moderation Team Resigns
#198Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would hold off until the Core Team is disbanded.
What a silly statement. Rust is, for many reasons, what you should be writing your future projects in. It has many forward-thinking features that represent where the field of SWE is heading. Letting political disagreements dictate what tech you choose is absolutely the silliest thing you can do (except Oracle, which can affect your bottom line). Use the best tool for the job and ignore the noise.
So take the good parts of Rust and put them into some other language.
Some C++ committee members have expressed interest in figuring out how the borrow checker can fit in. Right now nobody as a good idea, but if you do please write a paper.
There are lots of languages to choose from. Each has pros and cons. My company has seen bad results with rust - this is a reflection on the type of programmers who got on the rust project and not rust itself.
Re: Rust Moderation Team Resigns
#199Earlier quoted context omitted.
Linux and Python (not aware of GCC) effectively have BDFLs that can just nix anything (hence the "dictator" in BDFL). So these aren't just really comparable.
And they absolutely turn people off. The thing is, as long as it doesn't turn everyone off, it allows the project to move forward, because even with burned bridges, it leaves ownership clear. Communal decision making, however, does not have that advantage. If both sides of an issue, so to speak, become turned off of one another, you are more likely to have an abandoned project. There are, of course, other advantages…
Yes, which is why Rust has been such a failure.
Re: Rust Moderation Team Resigns
#200Earlier quoted context omitted.
Counterexample: Linux, GCC, Python, and practically the entire free software ecosystem from before the current crazy for hall-monitory-y supervision from above. It is simply demonstrably, factually, clearly not true that a growing community needs the kind of structures that Rust imposed on itself. It really makes me sad that a certain kind of person these days sees some kind of censorious overlord as essential for th…
Linux with Linus, who famously had to change his abusive tone? GCC with Richard Stallman, accused of various kinds of sexual misconduct? Python, which felt it necessary to impose a CoC eventually? Your counter examples are questionable at best.
He changed his tone, he wasn't "cancelled" as how it is a fad to do today. There are no "cocs" for a very long time now. It's only after pandering to the SJW's that are unfortunately causing harm to everything they touch.