41–50 of 555 posts
At least they didn't name it Crust.
I'm absolutely convinced that software names are a conspiracy for to bring users to the threshold that will make them weep.
Interesting, how many negative comments this gets. People seem to love monoculture run by committees. This is exactly what OSS is all about. Take a code base and develop it into different directions. Both code and organization. And "natural selection" will have some forks die and others strife.
Interesting, how many negative comments this gets. People seem to love monoculture run by committees. This is exactly what OSS is all about. Take a code base and develop it into different directions. Both code and organization. And "natural selection" will have some forks die and others strife.
I share the spirit. OSS is all about forking. My company works with a very very niche TypeScript fork as well. Everyone should be free to work and contribute in the way he prefers for whatever reasons.
Forks of a large project seldom survive, they almost always die with no active development. This is a futile move.
There's plenty of precedent that states forks die, however to describe it as entirely futile is: A) Not exactly constructive. B) Possibly untrue. The move might indeed die, if the rust foundations leadership gets it's act together. Which is a strong push for them to sort things out rather than assuming everything will be fine with their current heavy handed and opaque approach. Failing this, we could be in a situatio…
This happened a while ago and was related to the trademark/copyright issue. It’s an immature move and I can’t take this seriously. All this does is creating unnecessary drama surrounding the Rust foundation.
> All this does is creating unnecessary drama surrounding the Rust foundation. They are doing a fantastic job of creating drama all by themselves. I don't use Rust, but the constant childish bickering has turned me away from even caring to.
It made sense then and it makes sense now.
Interesting, how many negative comments this gets. People seem to love monoculture run by committees. This is exactly what OSS is all about. Take a code base and develop it into different directions. Both code and organization. And "natural selection" will have some forks die and others strife.
This. Let a 1000 flowers bloom. There is an essay about it. To lazy to google it. Maybe some fellow has it bookmarked.
That slogan was used in the summer of 1957 when the Chinese intelligentsia were invited to criticise the political system then obtaining in Communist China.
The full quotation, taken from a speech of Mao's in Peking in February 1957, is:
"Letting a hundred flowers blossom and a hundred schools of thought contend is the policy for promoting progress in the arts and the sciences and a flourishing socialist culture in our land."
This happened a while ago and was related to the trademark/copyright issue. It’s an immature move and I can’t take this seriously. All this does is creating unnecessary drama surrounding the Rust foundation.
Maybe so, but the best way to end up with well-intentioned people absolutely hating each other is to never allow the airing of grievances.
I'm hugely in favour of kind, empathic, and thoughtful communication, and I don't like the "people yelling at each other"-type of projects to the point I simply don't participate. But part of that is also accepting that sometimes people express themselves in less-than-ideal ways, and allowing for the fact that sometimes conflicts happen, and that some amount of yelling and drama is necessarily for a healthy community (or indeed, most relationships between people) because we're all flawed and emotional beings. Rust took a good idea and pushed it to the extreme, which rarely works out well.
Forks of a large project seldom survive, they almost always die with no active development. This is a futile move.
It worked for io.js when they split off from node.js. When io.js was re-merged in with node, the project was all the better for it. They ultimately improved Node's release schedule and cadence, governance, etc.
If it is merged back into the main project or left unmaintained the fork failed and died.
Forks of a large project seldom survive, they almost always die with no active development. This is a futile move.