There are several Rust-for-Linux folks who have complained about the same things and been at various levels of burned out over the course of the project. Ignoring them because it raises uncomfortable questions regarding the viability of the project doesn't make it go away, it just erases their experiences.
>The “so where do we go now?” almost gets ahead of itself before it says in the next paragraph that “the path is theirs to choose”. Well yeah because the only person who implied there was a crossroads is the author here.
>The predictable conclusion is to abandon the project and do something adjacent to the Linux Kernel.
This article is in response to someone who already decided to abandon the project, and to suggest what's next. I didn't impose the conclusion to abandon it on anyone, and in fact I explicitly supported it if burnout victims choose to return to the fold.
Yes, I stand by the conclusion that Rust-for-Linux is probably not a great idea, and I'm allowed to say that without being anyone's "enemy". I also believe people when they say they're burned out and quitting the project and take their needs seriously, something I think is missing from your comment. All of this is compatible with compassion. I'm not and have never been your enemy: I can say that I think it's not a good idea and wish you well in your efforts nevertheless, and I have.
That one maintainer is what’s in the HN consciousness right now. If you want to reference more than the current newscycle I suggest you use links.
I’m not surprised that you raise “erased experiences” in front of yourself. It’s typical of people who profess compassion in their rhetoric to feign a defense of people who were never attacked in the first place.
> This article is in response to someone who already decided to abandon the project, and to suggest what's next. I didn't impose the conclusion to abandon it on anyone, and in fact I explicitly supported it if burnout victims choose to return to the fold.
I don’t know you write in the Netherlands, but this looks like bullshit to me. The whole article is about the project itself. In the article you (after you almost got ahead of yourself) defensively precation that “the path is theirs to choose”. Really? There is no need to preface anything if you are adressing someone who already quit the project. They’re gonna do something else regardless and any suggestion is as good as any other.
You say that this is in “response to someone” who already decided to abandon the project. But it’s not about the specific person who just quit. Huh? So it’s written to someone non-specific yet the article just addresses the project all the time, even in the next to last paragraph:
> > So my suggestion for the Rust-for-Linux project is:
Who the hell writes like this? Just BS.
> I also believe people when they say they're burned out and quitting the project and take their needs seriously, something I think is missing from your comment.
My comment is addressed to you so that’s not germane to anything. But again, typical of professed compassionate rhetoric to draw attention to itself at every opportunity about how compassionate it is.
Are you insane?
- Several Rust for Linux maintainers have expressed frustration and burnout to some extent, that is a fact
- Drew express sympathy and solidarity towards people suffering of burnout, that is a fact (whether you believe this expression to be genuine or not is up to you, but Drew has a proven track record on condemning abuse and toxicity on all his platforms)
- Drew shares his opinion on what a way out of the frustrating process that is Rust for Linux could look like for people who want to get out. It's an opinion.
What in all of this causes you to be so angry? Is someone having a different opinion on the Rust for Linux project so unbearable to you?
I argue with the presumption of good faith, and whatever kind of argumentation you're making ain't that.
Now this compassionate revisit offers the same conclusion: don’t do Rust in Linux.
This person read that email about one Rust Kernel developer resigning because of burnout. Now he goes into how the Linux project is a “burnout machine” and how his heart goes out to the “developers who have been burned” (how did we get to plural?).[1]
The “so where do we go now?” almost gets ahead of itself before it says in the next paragraph that “the path is theirs to choose”. Well yeah because the only person who implied there was a crossroads is the author here.
The predictable conclusion is to abandon the project and do something adjacent to the Linux Kernel. But what if you cared about working on the Linux Kernel specifically? What if you cared about the code in the Linux Kernel itself, its long term health… hush, hush now. You are burned out and don’t know what you are saying.
The penultimate paragraph then declares that the Rust-for-Linux project itself is “burned out” (“and that’s awful”).
Who needs enemies with compassionate friends like this.
[1] How often do we read about maintainers suffering burnout? Every day? Do we then declare that the project is a failure, even when there are other maintainers left on the project?