drewdevault (u/drewdevault)

drewdevault commented on The Stallman Report stallman-report.org/... · Posted by u/pkilgore

h2odragon · a year ago

Anything more to these allegations than there was last time?

Or is this yet another chapter of someone's envy resorting to character assassination instead of finding contentment in their own work?

If these people succeeded in their apparent goal of making RMS less popular, do they think the world will love them for it? Why aint they signing their name?

drewdevault · a year ago

I've read most of the report and it's got a lot more than "last time". Speaking as someone who has done a lot of my own research on Stallman's bullshit, the depth of this report is astonishing. The allegations it makes regarding the conduct of the rest of the FSF is particularly alarming.

I think you should at least skim it before you comment.

drewdevault commented on Neurodivergence and Accountability in Free Software drewdevault.com/2024/09/2... · Posted by u/als0

chrsig · a year ago

I think the problem is looking at ND as an excuse rather than a reason to change intervention strategies.

Like...yeah, he had a problematic position. He got corrected and someone explained to him the problem and he reversed his position[0].

That's...how people grow.

[0] https://www.engadget.com/2019-09-17-rms-fsf-mit-epstein.html

drewdevault · a year ago

Your cited source is not really a good view of the situation. He did not reverse his position at all on the Minsky/Epstein issue (and the article quotes Stallman doubling down on this, saying he's resigning over "a series of misunderstandings and mischaracterizations" of himself), and he was re-instated at the FSF without ever providing a meaningful apology or a reversal of any of his problematic positions. Following his reinstatement he has continued to maintain and advocate for problematic political views regarding sexual assault, and he has never meaningfully retracted his views on child sexual abuse or apologized for anything he has ever said.

drewdevault commented on Rust in Linux Revisited drewdevault.com/2024/08/3... · Posted by u/Munksgaard

keybored · a year ago

How is he sympathetic to the cause? He isn’t. The original article gave the project a thumbs down and so does this one… only this time he is here to admit defeat on behalf of the project because of “burnout”.

All the praise is just nerdstroking to soften the kernel of the argument that they are working on the wrong thing.

drewdevault · a year ago

I am sympathetic to the cause. I respect the Linux project as a whole forming a consensus on the right direction for the kernel and I respect the right of the Rust developers to participate in the consensus-making process and advocate for what they believe is the right direction -- and put in the work to get there. I can hold this view and disagree with their opinion at the same time. I celebrate the difficult technical and political work they're doing to advance their cause, and I respect the hell out of that -- the fact that I would make different choices doesn't contradict this in any way.

The fact of the matter is that politics was always going to be difficult, and for all of the respect and admiration I have for the Rust-for-Linux team -- which I do have, thank you -- I am equally sympathetic to the kernel hackers who didn't ask for this project on their doorstep, and for their own needs to be accommodated. I condemn the toxicity that has bubbled up in this process, from C hackers and Rust hackers alike, but even absent that toxicity I think that the political challenges of Rust-for-Linux are enormous and distract from the fundamental work of the project.

People have burnt out and quit the project, and you cannot erase their experience when it questions the viability of the project. I'm offering them compassion and a different path that might celebrate their work without leading to burnout. People having burnt out and quitting the project is a historical fact, and not my fault, even if I'm the easy polemic for you to pin the blame on. I think it'd be a fucking shame if they quit pursing their passions for OS development in Rust over it and I've said as much and that's more than I can say for you and everyone else filling my messages with personal attacks and bad faith reading of everything I have to say.

drewdevault commented on Rust in Linux Revisited drewdevault.com/2024/08/3... · Posted by u/Munksgaard

keybored · a year ago

> Two years ago, seeing the Rust-for-Linux project starting to get the ball rolling, I wrote “Does Rust belong in the Linux kernel?”, penning a conclusion consistent with Betteridge’s law of headlines. Two years on we have a lot of experience to draw on to see how Rust-for-Linux is actually playing out, and I’d like to renew my thoughts with some hindsight – and more compassion. If you’re one of the Rust-for-Linux participants burned out or burning out on this project, I want to help. Burnout sucks – I’ve been there.

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?

drewdevault · a year ago

>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]

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.

drewdevault commented on Rust in Linux Revisited drewdevault.com/2024/08/3... · Posted by u/Munksgaard

_nalply · a year ago

Care to explain a little bit more? In which cases recompiling is required? Do you agree that Cygwin is a moderately successful reimplementation of a part of Linux? If you agree then I wonder how recompiling affects that Cygwin is a (partial) reimplementation?

drewdevault · a year ago

Cygwin is a POSIX implementation, not a Linux implementation. Linux is mostly POSIX compatible and so Cygwin is source-compatible, but not binary-compatible, with many programs that work on Linux.

drewdevault commented on Rust in Linux Revisited drewdevault.com/2024/08/3... · Posted by u/Munksgaard

daghamm · a year ago

Probably a significant number of HN readers have done something like this at one point. IIRC there is a MIT course where you do a modern Unix clone in one semester.

There is an ocean between that and being an expert in Linux internals.

Oh, and the original UNIX was done in one week by one guy.

drewdevault · a year ago

I have not contributed much to Linux -- my claim to fame is submitting a one-line patch which generated 50+ emails of arguments from LKML before Linus merged it -- but I have read a ton of the Linux source code and familiarized myself with many of its internals many times, as well as doing extensive low-level systems work in userspace against the Linux API/ABI. I often use it as a reference in my own osdev work, or working on Hare, etc. Have read a lot of the syscall API surface, DRM internals in depth, dcache and several filesystem implementations, io_uring, etc. Not ignorant to what would be involved in making a Linux-compatible kernel.

drewdevault commented on Rust in Linux Revisited drewdevault.com/2024/08/3... · Posted by u/Munksgaard

drewdevault · a year ago

Why would you even say something like that?

drewdevault commented on Aerc: A well-crafted TUI for email blog.sergeantbiggs.net/po... · Posted by u/edward

purplezooey · a year ago

Looks good but wish it was written in C.

drewdevault · a year ago

The original aerc prototype was written in C. It wasn't great.

https://git.sr.ht/~sircmpwn/aerc-legacy