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

311–320 of 1001 posts

Re: A Sad Day for Rust

#311

Post by watwut »

ekianjo wrote: post #35
ginko wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure which license was used by actix-web, but let me quote the last section of the MIT license as a reply: > THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILIT…

> I'm not sure which license was used by actix-web, but let me quote the last section of the MIT license as a reply This is a really bad answer because the most reliable and robust free software projects out there all use this same boilerplate license warnings. This is just for legal protection.

No, that is actual scope of warranty and assurance those developers intend to promiss. Everything else is beyond and above.

I pretty much guarantee you that if the "clearly mark your project as toy project" thing would become something people actually are expected to use, it would be everywhere too.

As if now it is nowhere, not on very clear toy projects and not on serious looking projects thay are sparsely maintained. The ones with license are all clear on limited warranty.

Re: A Sad Day for Rust

#312

Post by clarry »

zozbot234 wrote: post #255
lostmyoldone wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't get to invoke professionalism, or lack thereof in regards to some individuals work they've made available for free. Open source gives you access to source code to do with as you please. Storing your own copy is a good idea if it's something critical to your endeavors. The possibility of having to maintain anything of that nature yourself is always a risk. Expecting, demanding, or begging for anything except…

> You don't get to invoke professionalism, or lack thereof in regards to some individuals work they've made available for free. Plenty of people do exactly that: they point to work that they've made available for free on their GitHub as proof that they have the required skills and attitudes for professional work. The former Actix-web maintainer also used to do this, via their LinkedIn page. You can't have your cake a…

Linking a hobby project isn't necessarily meant to say anything about attitude at work. At work, the expected attitude might very well be that you have to bend over for and pamper customers and deal with no end of bullshit. Or maybe the expectation is that you never interact with customers directly, everything goes through customer support / sales / executives (after being checked by legal). A hobby project, by contrast, is your kingdom, and you can reject bullshit and/or have fun or just never respond to tickets without a patch because it's your free time and your pet project.

If I link my stuff or show it to a prospective employer, it's meant to show them that I can code. Nothing more. If they want to read too much into it and dismiss me as unprofessional because they found a cat meme, Theo quote, or link to hello.jpg, it's their loss not mine. Fuck 'em. Kinda unprofessional of them.

Re: A Sad Day for Rust

#313

Post by scoutt »

yingw787 wrote: post #61

This is an unfortunate, but I think necessary part of community growth. I really don’t think it’s possible to create a large community around a language that is business critical, and not have these kinds of setbacks where people get worked up and hurt each other’s feelings. Python has many of the same issues, where core devs and key maintainers go dark or behave badly. What Python does do pretty well, and what I lik…

Yes, but I wonder how many of those 50K users are "business critical" and how many are there just for trolling, gossip and drama.

Re: A Sad Day for Rust

#314

Post by cmiles74 »

vunie wrote: post #6

I don't know how to word this so I'll say it bluntly (and probably bear the blunt of this community as a consequence): If you're a developer of a project that is used in a security-sensitive context, you either be receptive to security concerns or you clearly label your project as a toy project. No one expects you to write perfect code, but we do expect you to fix flaws when you learn about them. Of course, you could…

The popularity of a project doesn't change it from "toy" or "personal" to "primary focus of developer's time". The developer might still only have so much time to spend on the project.

Re: A Sad Day for Rust

#315

Post by coldtea »

What's all this BS drama? It's the original maintainers project, his way or the highway. Those who don't like his use of unsafe can take a hike, fork it, write their own etc.

If the project owner just wants to use Rust as a fancier C, just for a few niceties, and mostly code in unsafe, that's their decision to make.

Re: A Sad Day for Rust

#316

Post by pfortuny »

boutad wrote: post #180
jwlake wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I honestly dont understand people being mad at this. Every dependancy I use I don't like 100% I fork and modify and then upstream changes, and if they never get merged, who cares? If there was a big user community that wanted different things, fork and have a seperate maintainer structure. Why drama?

Then you might end up with a bunch of different forks each with different fixes applied.

And?

Re: A Sad Day for Rust

#317

Post by [deleted] »

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…

[deleted]

Re: A Sad Day for Rust

#318

Post by [deleted] »

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…

[deleted]

Re: A Sad Day for Rust

#319

Post by protomyth »

cerebellum42 wrote: post #231
protomyth wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one expects you to write perfect code, but we do expect you to fix flaws when you learn about them. Looking at the postmortem[1], it looks like the patches provided were not good enough in the developer's eyes: I believed it held mutable aliasing invariant and I was very happy that someone found real problem. I wanted to solve the problem, just with a bit of creativity. And use RefCell solution only if it would be…

Maybe that is what the developer intended, but afaik it is not what he communicated. What he communicated was a flat out dismissal of the issue along with the proposed fixes. Followed by deleting the whole issue from GitHub. To be fair, there were some very unpleasant things said in there, but he could have just deleted those and maybe locked the conversation telling people about his plans. This whole thing was a fee…

So, how fast do people expect developers of open source projects to respond before someone is considered unresponsive?

I'm not sure combining social media with code control is going to be such a good thing for a lot of developers who might not like to program in a fishbowl.

Re: A Sad Day for Rust

#320

Post by School-Cotton »

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…

> People depend on this software

That is their own problem.

> I'm 80% through building an API using actix-web.

Feel free to pay someone to maintain it for you.

Post reply on HN