501–510 of 555 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
On the other hand it could become a place to test ideas and port the winners over to rust. It’s not necessarily negative.
Sorta like EGCS was for GCC?
So more like if C++ PLUS g++ where forked. Then C++ already had many compiler implementations before I was even born, and Rust has one serious one (and several other with explicitly different goals).
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.
The thing is, nothing is developed in a different direction here. The fork simply merges upstream changes, and has no current plans of revert introducing any technical differences. It's a spoon, not a fork. I think it's an important aspect of free software that it can be forked. That doesn't me we need to celebrate all forks. Some are great. Some cause more harm than good. But most are simply irrelevant. This one app…
Who told you that? Weird choice of words.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>In which case, CrabLang wanted to use the Rust trademarks to deceive people into thinking it's endorsed by the project and foundation. Instead, I see their statement as a visceral reaction to some legal threat they received that they don't think was valid. They probably weren't trying to deceive anyone, they just wanted to name their project "Rust Widget" or something and don't like that they are open to legal actio…
> they just wanted to name their project "Rust Widget" That's already explicitly covered by their trademark policy. > Using the Rust trademarks in the names of non-commercial products like RustPostgres or Rustymine, or in the name of code repositories in e.g. GitHub, is allowed when referring to use with or suitability for the Rust programming language. Such uses may also include the Rust logo, even in modified form.…
There is a world of difference between "intent" and reality.
Haven't ever used Rust and probably won't. Regardless, the melodramatic cliquey "I'm leaving the project" bluster as of late reminds me of my 14 year old self on various vbulletin forums and grants me conviction avoiding adopting this language and its ecosystem. I prefer the tools I use for building businesses to be administered by adults.
The more something is governed in the open, the more we can see problems. To me that's a good thing. Compare Germany's govt to China's: Germany is certainly not as efficient, but it's transparency allows many to see it's inner workings are comment about it. I hope in the long run this transparency is what businesses prefer in an open source project.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I like languages that are a monoculture. It's a mess when you have many flavors of a language. Anyone else here remember the joy of various Fortran variants? It was a pain in the ass - VMS Fortran, Cray Fortran, HPF, etc... ("How do I call a subroutine with a Cray Pointer" - pointers were variant specific? Ugh). Pulling the variants together under a common standard made it reasonable to build projects from multiple g…
Pascal (eg Turbo Pascal) vs Super Pascal vs Object Pascal also springs to mind.
I disagree with the general sentiment in this thread that this is a useless immature move. Sure, Crab will almost certainly not replace Rust, but that is not the goal. The ultimate objective is to influence Rust stakeholders' decisions. This is similar to a strike where ultimately your goal is not to destroy the company or to quit and leave, but to achieve better conditions. In both cases it sometimes works and somet…
It’s evidence of division and strife. They have allowed the environment to get toxic. Groups that were planning on adopting Rust will now think twice, as it’s future now looks uncertain. All organizations that produce something valuable face this test, it’s the ones that don’t fracture that succeed.
One thing I always find interesting / amusing is how the timing of certain types of post here on HN is in a sense far more informative (e.g. by implication as to "what is the current zeitgeist that has suddenly made this "news" or relevant again?), than the linked articles themselves. E.g. crablang wasn't exactly announced yesterday for this to be newsworthy in itself; but an HN top post on crablang almost serves as…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
OK but it says "100% less bureaucracy", although it doesn't actually seem to have a plan for that. Changing the name is... fine? Like it's definitely a thing you can do, for sure. I'm not sure what that accomplishes - you can use this project and there's no trademark policy so... I guess you could abuse that if you wanted to? Like you could start your own "CrabCon" and no one could say anything about it legally... ok…
The "less bureaucracy" is the lack of the same trademark policy. That's literally it. They're not threatening to sue you if you don't include disclaimers on everything you do while using their language.
Neither is Rust, so we're back to this being pretty stupid.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're making a huge assumption with the "unpaid free time" part of this. A lot of Rust development is driven by corporations who are directly paying engineers to work on it, and the rust foundation has a lot of money coming in via donations (literally millions).
> A lot of Rust development is driven by corporations who are directly paying engineers to work on it, and the rust foundation has a lot of money coming in via donations (literally millions). Then why are people set up about the trademark/copyright/license issue?
For the same reason people go ballistic over myriad other trivial things (e.g. Twitter), they find drama entertaining and outrage is effortless and consequence free (for them).
I'm not thrilled with the trademark changes myself but forking because they posted a draft and asked for comment is absolutely dumb as heck and not productive. It just adds to the drama.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> A lot of Rust development is driven by corporations who are directly paying engineers to work on it, and the rust foundation has a lot of money coming in via donations (literally millions). Then why are people set up about the trademark/copyright/license issue?
>Then why are people set up about the trademark/copyright/license issue? For the same reason people go ballistic over myriad other trivial things (e.g. Twitter), they find drama entertaining and outrage is effortless and consequence free (for them). I'm not thrilled with the trademark changes myself but forking because they posted a draft and asked for comment is absolutely dumb as heck and not productive. It just ad…
it’s like their personality draws them to it? it seems more prominent in this community