Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Git: Introduce Rust and announce it will become mandatory in the build system

lore.kernel.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 433 posts

Re: Git: Introduce Rust and announce it will become mandatory in the build system

#21

Post by kstrauser »

binary132 wrote: post #11
justinhj wrote: post #7

"Announce that Git 3.0 will make Rust a mandatory part of our build infrastructure." Sounds like it will be mandatory to use Rust to build all of Git. The title implies Rust itself will be mandatory.

how is that not the same thing?

My last company used Jenkins, so our build infrastructure depended on Java. We used zero code outside of supporting Jenkins. So Java was required to build our stuff, but not to write or run it.

Edit: nope, I’m wrong. On reading the link, they’re setting up the build infrastructure to support Rust in the Git code itself.

Re: Git: Introduce Rust and announce it will become mandatory in the build system

#22

Post by lloydatkinson »

kstrauser wrote: post #19
antihero wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shouldn't these platforms work on getting Rust to support it rather than have our tools limited by what they can consume? https://github.com/Rust-GCC/gccrs

Yes. It benefits them to have ubiquitous tools supported on their system. The vendors should put in the work to make that possible. I don’t maintain any tools as popular as git or you’d know me by name, but darned if I’m going to put in more than about 2 minutes per year supporting non-Unix. (This said as someone who was once paid to improve Ansible’s AIX support for an employer. Life’s too short to do that nonsense…

As you're someone very familiar with Ansible, what are your thoughts on it in regards to IBM's imminent complete absorption of RedHat? I can't imagine Ansible, or any other RedHat product, doing well with that.

Re: Git: Introduce Rust and announce it will become mandatory in the build system

#23

Post by Hizonner »

jmillikin wrote: post #9
politelemon wrote: post #2

> Introducing Rust is impossible for some platforms and hard for others. Please could someone elaborate on this.

There's at least one proprietary platform that supports Git built by via a vendor-provided C compiler, but for which no public documentation exists and therefore no LLVM support is possible. Ctrl+F for "NonStop" in https://lwn.net/Articles/998115/

Sucks to be that platform?

Seriously, I guess they just have to live without git if they're not willing to take on support for its tool chain. Nobody cares about NonStop but the very small number of people who use it... who are, by the way, very well capable of paying for it.

Re: Git: Introduce Rust and announce it will become mandatory in the build system

#24

Post by ekidd »

ziml77 wrote: post #20

Does anyone with insight into Git development know if we should care about this? Is this just a proposal out of nowhere from some rando or is this an idea that a good portion of Git contributors have wanted?

For whatever it might be worth...

Looking at the comment thread, at least one person I recognize as a core maintainer seems to be acting as if this is an official plan that they've already agreed on the outline of, if not the exact timing. And they seem to acknowledge that this breaks some of the more obscure platforms out there.

Re: Git: Introduce Rust and announce it will become mandatory in the build system

#25

Post by kstrauser »

lloydatkinson wrote: post #22
kstrauser wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. It benefits them to have ubiquitous tools supported on their system. The vendors should put in the work to make that possible. I don’t maintain any tools as popular as git or you’d know me by name, but darned if I’m going to put in more than about 2 minutes per year supporting non-Unix. (This said as someone who was once paid to improve Ansible’s AIX support for an employer. Life’s too short to do that nonsense…

As you're someone very familiar with Ansible, what are your thoughts on it in regards to IBM's imminent complete absorption of RedHat? I can't imagine Ansible, or any other RedHat product, doing well with that.

I wouldn’t say I’m very familiar. I don’t use it extensively anymore, and not at all at work. But in general, I can’t imagine a way in which IBM’s own corporate culture could contribute positively to any FOSS projects if they removed the RedHat veneer. Not saying it’s impossible, just that my imagination is more limited than the idea requires.

Re: Git: Introduce Rust and announce it will become mandatory in the build system

#26

Post by ekidd »

binary132 wrote: post #14
StopDisinfo910 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One phrasing implies contributions will have to be in Rust, the other doesn’t. I was confused in the same way after reading the submission title. Mandating Rust would be a far more radical change.

I see. No, I understood it the way it is, as introducing it as a new hard dependency in git 3. I suppose it is a pilot for making it mandatory for contributions / incrementally replacing the existing code in the future, though.

Git is pretty modular, and it already includes multiple languages. I guess that significant parts of it will remain in C for a long time, including incremental improvements to those parts. Though it wouldn't surprise me if some parts of git did become all-Rust over time.

Re: Git: Introduce Rust and announce it will become mandatory in the build system

#27

Post by formerly_proven »

jmillikin wrote: post #9
politelemon wrote: post #2

> Introducing Rust is impossible for some platforms and hard for others. Please could someone elaborate on this.

There's at least one proprietary platform that supports Git built by via a vendor-provided C compiler, but for which no public documentation exists and therefore no LLVM support is possible. Ctrl+F for "NonStop" in https://lwn.net/Articles/998115/

Nonstop is still supported? :o

Re: Git: Introduce Rust and announce it will become mandatory in the build system

#30

Post by altairprime »

ziml77 wrote: post #20

Does anyone with insight into Git development know if we should care about this? Is this just a proposal out of nowhere from some rando or is this an idea that a good portion of Git contributors have wanted?

You can perhaps learn more about their involvement in the community from this year’s summit panel interview: https://youtu.be/vKsOFHNSb4Q

In a brief search, they’re engineering manager for GitLab, appear to be a frequent contributor of high-difficulty patches to Git in general, and are listed as a possible mentor for new contributors.

Given the recent summit, it seems likely that this plan was discussed there; I hadn’t dug into that possibility further but you could if desired.

Post reply on HN