• FooBarrington@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 days ago

    Why lie about something so easy to check? Here’s the maintainer himself saying that the issue isn’t “R4L folks wanting to toss the maintenance headaches over the wall, for someone else to deal with”:

    I accept that you don’t want to be involved with Rust in the kernel, which is why we offered to maintain the Rust abstraction layer for the DMA coherent allocator as a separate component (which it would be anyways) ourselves.

    Which doesn’t help me a bit. Every additional bit that the another language creeps in drastically reduces the maintainability of the kernel as an integrated project. The only reason Linux managed to survive so long is by not having internal boundaries, and adding another language complely breaks this. You might not like my answer, but I will do everything I can do to stop this.

    • ubergeek@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      5 days ago

      And, again, prove him wrong, maintain a tree that shows it’s workable, and with minimum maintainability concerns. If there truly are minimal maintenance concerns, a separate tree would be quite simple to maintain!

      • FooBarrington@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 days ago

        For the last time, the decision to include Rust has already been made. The “prove him wrong by developing out-of-tree” has already happened.

        • ubergeek@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          5 days ago

          Apparently, it hasn’t happened. Because nobody else beside R4L is helping it along.

          Sorry, but ya’ll just have more work to do, is all. Do it, or don’t, I don’t care. I honestly don’t care one iota if Rust ever gets in the kernel, or not. What I do care about is that the Linux kernel remains a stable project.

          Take the advice, or don’t. Its on you.

          • FooBarrington@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            5 days ago

            There’s no advice to take for working with maintainers who’ll abuse their power to stop a project they don’t like.

            • ubergeek@lemmy.today
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              edit-2
              5 days ago

              Ok, so then just toss in the towel, and make your own kernel, with hookers, blow, and Rust. Sorry.

              Because the only “power” maintainers have is over the Linux kernel tree. They have no power over your own tree you maintain, with your Rust team. They have no power over the Rust kernel projects already working.

              Hell, they don’t even have the power to keep you from taking their driver work, to build on! In fact, it’s encouraged!

              This may come as a shock to you, and other proponents of the R4L team: The world does NOT revolve around you, and your preferred development language.

              • FooBarrington@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                6
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                5 days ago

                Or I can ask Linus to do his job properly and lead on this issue, whether it’s for or against R4L.

                You seem to be under the impression that I’m somehow involved with R4L or Rust, or that I even use Rust. None of these are true. I’m just seeing an example of bad project management, and people like you that keep lying to justify the maintainers decision.

                • ubergeek@lemmy.today
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  5 days ago

                  Or I can ask Linus to do his job properly and lead on this issue, whether it’s for or against R4L.

                  Linus owes you, nor anybody not signing his paycheck, a goddamed thing. Did you bother to read the article linked here?

                  You seem to be under the impression that I’m somehow involved with R4L or Rust, or that I even use Rust.

                  Ok then.

                  I’m just seeing an example of bad project management, and people like you that keep lying to justify the maintainers decision.

                  Nobody committing code to the Linux project, nor anybody doing the administrivia work owes anyone not involved in the project a goddamned thing. If you think you can manage it better, then fork, and do it.

                  Otherwise, you’re expecting other people to do free labor for you, and to do it to your specs. The world doesn’t work that way, and nobody owes you their labor.

                  Labor does. Laying out demands on labor does nothing, unless you’re the one meeting their material needs.

                  • FooBarrington@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    5
                    arrow-down
                    3
                    ·
                    5 days ago

                    Linus owes you, nor anybody not signing his paycheck, a goddamed thing.

                    No, he owes the community to fulfill his role in this community project. He’s not a king or a monarch or whatever you think he is. If he’s not ready to fulfill this role, he should step down as project lead.