This is a very confusing announcement of..... what exactly? A github repo hosting the blog that the announcement was posted on!
There isn't anything of substance here, as far as I can tell. While the whole thing "looks" official and has a very official name, there is nothing of substance there. Some of the text is incoherent, telling us that the author learned some Rust as a break from university (good for him!). Some parts of the text use "we" language, other parts "I" language. But nothing really explains what this is about or why anyone should care, what the actual deliverables of this nebulous "organization" will be, who its participants are (other than blog-author-dude), how much industry support it has, or why this will have any impact. But on the flipside, the mission statement is a clearly defined "We want to do what you want to do" (actual quote from the page), and there is a whole GitHub repo hosting the logo of the project, so clearly this is going places.
Thought I would add some clarity here: many comments here are correct in that the announcement is largely symbolic. The substance is minimal because this is a "call to arms" more than anything. Since there's been some gridlock in creating a central place for Rust Cloud Native _anything_, I mainly just wanted to start _something_.
I can also see how the exchange of "I" and "we" was confusing. I talked to several folks about how to start this, so I did not want to claim sole ownership of ideas.
This was created entirely with volunteer time, and would ideally not have its course determined from a BDFL (me, in this case). If people want a Discord, a Zoom meetups, events hosted, etc., we will do that. I do not want to burn out by creating a bunch of low quality community locations prematurely.
These intentions could have be articulated more clearly, and I may edit the announcement post to do so. Thank you.
Like I said in a comment further down below, I think my initial reaction and post were way too harsh (i.e., not constructive and cynical), sorry for that. It's great that you're taking the initiative and trying to build something, and I wish you all the best with it.
To be more constructive: I personally feel that such efforts have an easier way of getting of the ground if you first build consensus with a smaller group in private. Ideally this would include some of the influential people in this sphere, (devs of larger projects in the space, cloud providers, famous rustaceans, ...). Otherwise the initiative does not have a lot of credibility (because it hinges on the words of someone most people will not have heard of).
I find some of the wording weird in many places:
1) It gives the impression that this is an already established organization, when in fact it is merely a call to action.
2) You never actually say what you are trying to do. Even after all of this, I'm still not sure what you want to create. A community? A main code repository? A specific technical solution? You say you want to "enable the usage of Rust in the cloud". But that's super vague. I can use Rust in the cloud today already, so what are you _really_ after? And _how_ are you going to achieve that?
3) Putting the Code of Conduct front and center in your "approach" is just super weird.It's great that you have one, but it should ultimately just be a footnote. If someone asks you "how do you play hockey?", you don't answer: "well, there are strict rules about fouls, and if you commit one, you'll have to go on a time-out". Yes, there are some rules you'll need to follow, but that's not the main point of the game.
> Like I said in a comment further down below, I think my initial reaction and post were way too harsh (i.e., not constructive and cynical), sorry for that. It's great that you're taking the initiative and trying to build something, and I wish you all the best with it.
Thank you for being understanding, I appreciate it.
> To be more constructive: I personally feel that such efforts have an easier way of getting of the ground if you first build consensus with a smaller group in private. Ideally this would include some of the influential people in this sphere, (devs of larger projects in the space, cloud providers, famous rustaceans, ...). Otherwise the initiative does not have a lot of credibility (because it hinges on the words of someone most people will not have heard of).
In hindsight, having the folks I've spoken to in private be part of the "launch" and PR reviews could have prevented some confusion.
That being said, I did not want to compose a large core group without giving the opportunity for new people to join.
It was a trade-off to launch small with the intent to start public partnerships with well-known people in the future.
I've spoken to some of these folks in the past, and we intend on collaborating/cooperating if the community's desires warrant it (e.g. a new channel in the official Discord).
> 1) It gives the impression that this is an already established organization, when in fact it is merely a call to action.
I would argue that it's an established organization, but we need to be clear that one of its first goals is to gather community feedback on determining where it should go next.
I did not want ideation happen behind closed doors,
It's established with the intent to be...
1. transformed
2. de-scoped to purely maintaining the website and itself
> 2) You never actually say what you are trying to do. Even after all of this, I'm still not sure what you want to create. A community? A main code repository? A specific technical solution? You say you want to "enable the usage of Rust in the cloud". But that's super vague. I can use Rust in the cloud today already, so what are you _really_ after? And _how_ are you going to achieve that?
This is a good point.
I've touched on this above, but it exists to facilitate community ideation and to maintain a website to connect people interested in cloud native Rust.
I believe the issue here is that I've mistakenly blended the mission with the goal(s).
The mission tackles the "why", which is the enablement piece.
That doesn't lean into the "real action".
The goal(s) are what we are trying to do.
Currently, that includes maintaining the existing repos, and gathering community feedback via issue/discussion filing.
There's an issue tracking splitting the "mission" from the "goal(s)", and I think it'll make the answer to this much more clear: https://github.com/rust-cloud-native/core/issues/7
> The substance is minimal because this is a "call to arms" more than anything
To do what, exactly? You point to a blurb from CNCF, but then don't say how Rust fits in to it at all. It's really not clear what the goals actually are, beyond coming across as buzzword bingo. I'm sure that's not your intent.
Hmmm I see your point. Buzzword bingo is certainly not the intent, that is true. Perhaps, we need to be clear that while our _mission_ is to "enable the usage of Rust in the cloud", our _goal_ is to maintain existing repos within the org and take issue/discussion filer input for next steps.
I believe the issue is that I've blended "why we exist" with "what we are doing". I'll fix that. Thank you for the feedback.
I've addressed this in more detail in response to the top comment, but this is exactly correct.
I'll admit, I could have expressed the intent more clearly, but there's been gridlock here, so I created the organization with the intent of doing _something_.
What confuses me is that I know for a fact that several of those projects have or will be joining the CNCF, so I’m not sure they are in need of a governing body.
As a co-maintainer of kube-rs, this is the first I've heard of this working group. I don't have anything against them or the idea per se, but I'd have appreciated a heads up before being listed in a way that could be read as us endorsing them.
I'd be happy to re-architect the website to make it clear that site exists to endorse projects and not the other way around. The latter is definitely not the intent, so if it reads that way, we should change it. Please feel free to file an issue: https://github.com/rust-cloud-native/rust-cloud-native.githu...
EDIT: I have added a section explicitly stating the projects showcased are not officially affiliated unless given explicit consent from owners/maintainers.
Of course! I do not want us to disrespect maintainers/owners; quite the opposite actually. Please never hesitate to file an issue for this kind of thing.
I disagree. A typical announcement says WHO does WHAT and HOW, maybe even WHY in succinct, clear language. However, this post grinds my gears in all the wrong ways. The proper way to do what that guy set out to do would've been to write an RFC to some mailing list (or some Rust forum/social channel) and collectively build up a group. But announcing a group before the group's actually been formed is putting the cart before the horse. Don't get me wrong, I think it's laudable that someone started this effort, but it seems to me that it's being done/communicated in a fairly naive/inexperienced fashion. I'm sure they'll learn as they go along, and I probably am being way to harsh on people who actually are trying to do something good for the community.
> A typical announcement says WHO does WHAT and HOW, maybe even WHY in succinct, clear language.
I think that's really fair feedback FWIW.
> would've been to write an RFC to some mailing list
I don't think this is a thing in Rust, but there is a user forum/ subreddit.
> I'm sure they'll learn as they go along, and I probably am being way to harsh on people who actually are trying to do something good for the community.
Yeah I think that's all I'm saying. Maybe this is the wrong venue, but I don't think your criticism was necessary or constructive in totality - some of it is, some of it isn't. I'm sure that much of this feedback will be incorporated, based on what I'm seeing from the author.
The reason why the GitHub organization was created BEFORE anything else was because of a tweet.
I originally tweeted that I created the organization, and wanted to see if people were interested in using it (regardless of ownership).
It unexpectedly blew up, and with encouragement from replies/DMs, I decided to add least plant a flag.
Just old enough to have seen how weird and political official announcements can get, and how important it is to nail communication if you're in the limelight.
I'm not too bright, so apologies in advance. What is this? And why do people need to care?
You made a new Github organization to ... do what? Are you launching a new CloudNative project in Rust? It's an umbrella group with a cute logo and it doesn't do or own anything? But there's a launch? My head is exploding.
The page seems pretty clear about the goals. Based on the https://github.com/rust-embedded group (which appears to curate/incubate some repos on that theme), there's a new group focused on using rust in the cloud.
I understand they're attempting to emulate rust-embedded. Perhaps launch this when you have a repo with code to share? People care about rust-embedded because of the quality of the projects under the umbrella. Would anyone care if rust-embedded had only a vague wiki page and nothing else to offer?
I don't know, but assume it's usually "hey Alice, hey Bob, I made Charliecracker, you made FlannAlice and Bobernetes, we're working on similar things, let's form a club".
These are fair points. I've addressed them in comments within the main thread.
We (me, at the moment) am making changes to the original post and the repositories themselves, to clarify intent here.
TLDR: there was a bit of a "the chicken and the egg" problem with cloud native Rust. My approach might not have resulted in the cleanest "launch", but with few volunteer hours and nothing similar in existence, I wanted to at least provide a sandbox or canvas for issue/discussion filers to help dictate where it goes next.
Look inside the docker directory, and in the Just file. You can generate an alpine linux docker image/container that has only your program and any dependencies statically linked.
This should, in theory, run your application in any cloud or linux server that has Docker support. Your image should also be very small (a few dozen megabytes at most).
Haha... if this were about literally ANYTHING other than Rust, then this blogspam wouldn't be on the front page of Hacker News at all.
I've tinkered with the language. It has some interesting ideas. More power to its fans. But sheesh, you folks get into "vegan" or "CrossFit" territory sometimes.
I totally understand the annoyance with cult-like behavior in the tech industry...and even as a fan of Rust, I can't help but see how obnoxious the fandom can be.
But I would much rather that cults form around ideas like memory safety in low-level languages than things like Elon Musk or Apple...which is literally everywhere on HN. Almost any postitive headline about either makes the front page in like 10 seconds, and almost any negative headline gets flagged and dumped off the front page (and the same goes for comments in their respective threads). The teeny bopper-like obsession with Rust is relatively benign in comparison.
Many keep trying since 1950's, unfortunely it took a free beer OS to spoil it, and now it is a quixotic battle of multiple generations to come, to bring it back into course.
> you folks are getting into "vegan" or "CrossFit" territory with this thing.
It's more like CRISPR for our industry. Or the invention of the seat belt. Safe and modern, when you typically had to choose just one. You wouldn't go calling those seat belt people crazy, would you?
It also comes at a time where the scripting, dynamic types, and bad package managers are coming under increased scrutiny. The culmination of so many headwinds meets a language that addresses all of the problems.
Rust should eat Python, Ruby, and Javascript too. It's not just coming for C++'s lunch.
There isn't anything of substance here, as far as I can tell. While the whole thing "looks" official and has a very official name, there is nothing of substance there. Some of the text is incoherent, telling us that the author learned some Rust as a break from university (good for him!). Some parts of the text use "we" language, other parts "I" language. But nothing really explains what this is about or why anyone should care, what the actual deliverables of this nebulous "organization" will be, who its participants are (other than blog-author-dude), how much industry support it has, or why this will have any impact. But on the flipside, the mission statement is a clearly defined "We want to do what you want to do" (actual quote from the page), and there is a whole GitHub repo hosting the logo of the project, so clearly this is going places.