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

A Sad Day for Rust

words.steveklabnik.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 1001 posts

Re: A Sad Day for Rust

#241

Post by quotemstr »

coleifer wrote: post #63

I am disgusted by the cultural phenomenon of making sarcastic call-out comments on twitter/etc., with an eye towards building up enough community outrage to force an issue. There are people who forget that open-source does not entitle you to anything (read the fucking license). Maintainers of large projects are not even allowed to have a bad day, to make a brusque comment, or to disagree with a majority -- without so…

I too am disgusted by this phenomenon. The key thing to remember is that outrage has power only because you let it have power. Twitter snark isn't the real world. Neither is Reddit outrage. If you totally ignore these hives and their angry buzzing, you'll have greater peace of mind and lose nothing.

Re: A Sad Day for Rust

#242

Post by Grue3 »

I remember when people were claiming Common Lisp community is toxic, but I find that it is the languages which tend to focus on "building community" with Community Managers and Codes of Conduct that end up becoming truly toxic cesspools in the end. See also node.js. The focus on community attracts people who aren't interested in programming, but rather those who want a playground for gaining clout and trolling. You never hear about C++ drama, why is that?

Re: A Sad Day for Rust

#243

Post by foldr »

mileycyrusXOXO wrote: post #12

I understand maintaining open source is a lot of work and why someone might want to call it a day - but this is probably the least professional way someone could do it. People depend on this software. It is inconsiderate to just move it to private instead of taking the time to hand it off to someone else. I'm 80% through building an API using actix-web. Time to reassess whether or not I should start over - wonder wha…

>I understand maintaining open source is a lot of work and why someone might want to call it a day - but this is probably the least professional way someone could do it.

Why would he be obliged to do it in a professional way? He's not being paid.

Re: A Sad Day for Rust

#244

Post by wgerard »

throwlaplace wrote: post #224
wgerard wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's another analogy: A homeless person asks for money. You don't give him money but give him some advice. Can the homeless person rightfully criticize you? You can absolutely criticize choices made by volunteers. I don't think you need to think too deeply about this to imagine situations where few would object to criticizing a volunteer's behavior. An obvious one would be if an open source maintainer willfully inc…

what is the relationship of your analogy to this situation? is the maintainer the homeless person in your analogy? you can criticize all you want as an exercise of your critical thinking faculties but the volunteer is not in anyway obligated to heed the criticism. "it's my money/time and I'll spend it how I want, which includes burning it" is the fundamental axiom. Given that that is the foundation what sense would i…

> what is the relationship of your analogy to this situation? is the maintainer the homeless person in your analogy?

It's your analogy, you tell me.

> you can criticize all you want as an exercise of your critical thinking faculties but the volunteer is not in anyway obligated to heed the criticism.

Nobody said they were. Nobody's trying to punish the maintainer legally. That doesn't mean criticism won't be offered or warranted.

Here's another analogy: You have a right to be a jerk in real life. Nobody's going to physically or legally stop you, barring extreme circumstances. People will still criticize you for being a jerk, as is THEIR right.

Re: A Sad Day for Rust

#245

Post by NopeNotToday »

IMO, the most telling point of this is when the author rejected a security patch because it was not creative enough. He was more of an artist than an engineer.

What was the patch? It was very strait forward, simple, uncreative change, intention was just to remove unsafe not to fix existing code. I believe software development is one of the most creative work we do, and creativity is part of why we love software development, why it is fun. Especially if you combine it with real world projects constraints. “creative constrains” could be source of very interesting solutions. Being on the edge of your abilities is super fun. So uncreative change felt boring https://github.com/actix/actix-web

Re: A Sad Day for Rust

#246

Post by burlesona »

coleifer wrote: post #63

I am disgusted by the cultural phenomenon of making sarcastic call-out comments on twitter/etc., with an eye towards building up enough community outrage to force an issue. There are people who forget that open-source does not entitle you to anything (read the fucking license). Maintainers of large projects are not even allowed to have a bad day, to make a brusque comment, or to disagree with a majority -- without so…

I agree. I think this is an extension of the general social media mob culture that we have. I see it as one of the major problems of our day, because most people in most situations just bow to the mob, which just makes it worse. I don’t know how we solve that, either.

Re: A Sad Day for Rust

#247

Post by kandeel4411 »

TheRealDunkirk wrote: post #90
ddevault wrote: post #38

A lot of this thread has it wrong, and this wrongness contributes to the problem which led to this. I have two simple mantras which establish my philosophy here: 1. YOU are responsible for your dependencies. 2. Open source participants are volunteers and owe you nothing. It was never Nikolay's job to vet actix-web for you, nor did it become his job when the library became popular, nor does invoking "security" change…

Seems like there should have been some sort of response from the maintainer about the _philosophy_ of why he was doing things the was he was, and people could either get onboard with the connecting points of that, or get lost. So far, in all of this drama, I have yet to see where any of that might have been explained. I don't use Rust, but I understand the significance of the experiment, and I think I for one, would…

I believe he already included that in the README https://github.com/actix/actix-web

Re: A Sad Day for Rust

#248

Post by lukebitts »

nickbauman wrote: post #209
ddevault wrote: post #38

A lot of this thread has it wrong, and this wrongness contributes to the problem which led to this. I have two simple mantras which establish my philosophy here: 1. YOU are responsible for your dependencies. 2. Open source participants are volunteers and owe you nothing. It was never Nikolay's job to vet actix-web for you, nor did it become his job when the library became popular, nor does invoking "security" change…

When you write "... the Rust project saw Rust as more than just the language. The community and the people mattered." I have to ask why anyone thinks this isn't true for ANY code/stack/dep out there? When I evaluate a technology for its appropriateness I first look at who's using it: Literally "Who are these people and what are they working on with this stuff?" The answer to this question determines more than 80% of…

> Rust seems to be being used most by people who are interested in blockchain and crypto

Where did you get that from? From what I've seen every single blockchain/crypto post on Rust's subreddit is downvoted into the negatives.

Re: A Sad Day for Rust

#249

Post by quotemstr »

steveklabnik wrote: post #116
sequoia wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Forking is extremely aggressive This is not so. If you said "forking can be perceived as an aggressive action"* I would not disagree with you, but in the context of an FOS ecosystem, forking should not be perceived as aggressive, and it definitely is not inherently so. If someone doesn't want anyone to fork their project, why release it under an open source license? Free/Open source, full control: pick one. I objec…

I actually agree with you in a general sense, but our own opinions don't really matter much. What matters is the opinions in the aggregate. I wish that it wasn't perceived as such, but the reality is that it is. Ignore that at your own peril.

What peril? Why is everyone treating online outrage mobs as if they had any power or authority? Who cares if some unimportant anonymous commentator thinks a fork is aggressive?

Re: A Sad Day for Rust

#250

Post by jupp0r »

nickbauman wrote: post #209
ddevault wrote: post #38

A lot of this thread has it wrong, and this wrongness contributes to the problem which led to this. I have two simple mantras which establish my philosophy here: 1. YOU are responsible for your dependencies. 2. Open source participants are volunteers and owe you nothing. It was never Nikolay's job to vet actix-web for you, nor did it become his job when the library became popular, nor does invoking "security" change…

When you write "... the Rust project saw Rust as more than just the language. The community and the people mattered." I have to ask why anyone thinks this isn't true for ANY code/stack/dep out there? When I evaluate a technology for its appropriateness I first look at who's using it: Literally "Who are these people and what are they working on with this stuff?" The answer to this question determines more than 80% of…

> Rust seems to be being used most by people who are interested in blockchain and crypto.

What makes you think that? I don't believe that is true, it's like saying C++ programmers are mostly interested in high frequency trading.

Post reply on HN