From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from fhigh-a2-smtp.messagingengine.com (fhigh-a2-smtp.messagingengine.com [103.168.172.153]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 66C0225A63D for ; Tue, 23 Sep 2025 04:54:53 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=103.168.172.153 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1758603297; cv=none; b=OI/zYUF8NrPfzQ+7XuyUNBZx1/IMVefj3l+1JSMLL1PZpPOii9GpMe5A/4+sNewlUtkAzCBD7T3wAAMZP5f++Gs/aniCBMeXHJ2tqaNbyT0/XByiRedU29QoqYd4qVS7G63zN6KOqlajDUSoJSVQeL/8ezpnflh6S+XQna6GyMo= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1758603297; c=relaxed/simple; bh=RQ4XhZG2/Ju5FQQAzASAeo7LIAguZeJdIKwkaR9vnDI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=jDn65AqNKaSKsR2Au4DHmiSpTXTMcClsOoG3ScWMNhqrYmS1Ey0LBOoc599laTtnYvmov0PyQthY1CO/CjiLCGZJ/Wbl6iNuVo4m/dKAOfPLukfPQB3i5foA5pi3QKZrf40r90i8SlJJP55ro//x9OGvoJNu3rIJyJJ25hy5gZI= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=pks.im; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pks.im; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=pks.im header.i=@pks.im header.b=hoPonu6t; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b=nhky318Q; arc=none smtp.client-ip=103.168.172.153 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=pks.im Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pks.im Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=pks.im header.i=@pks.im header.b="hoPonu6t"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b="nhky318Q" Received: from phl-compute-04.internal (phl-compute-04.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailfhigh.phl.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B587140009A; Tue, 23 Sep 2025 00:54:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from phl-mailfrontend-01 ([10.202.2.162]) by phl-compute-04.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 23 Sep 2025 00:54:53 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=pks.im; h=cc:cc :content-type:content-type:date:date:from:from:in-reply-to :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject :subject:to:to; s=fm1; t=1758603293; x=1758689693; bh=bvzcgEyFb5 BcN4TtnLURUxWJ8DxKi8ZFlaFmmZq2nvE=; b=hoPonu6tXAP7cdhyBjPDdqR53/ vewskKNw03bUwQcMTKYeFN245XwbJIxM5hbqgpS2j6ijoU7h+QjMfXl64uysZx// HC9G7Yu/i2rAb5BvgYq8nHgWAdFuMQaAvMLVnYOdXxkI+ah6fvlg/fzgwB8zlwVg sAg1jd0+9rxsZ1+KrVF4pHHJ8O6IUcMFfJ9WmfJ2Xrccy3FV2LegrU9rs1+s1cDn bhuctHSqBIG/doXylfUTpQfVhpBbNhei6nXNZIiicWFzcLtXBFC4rIjOB6WQUW5j jxSjxVhAUobtAxCJby1rHwlcFqdy9MnMBDGEp+cBXUaAlQYMXY7tnGWF41mQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date :feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject:subject:to :to:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; t= 1758603293; x=1758689693; bh=bvzcgEyFb5BcN4TtnLURUxWJ8DxKi8ZFlaF mmZq2nvE=; b=nhky318QnEQxjRZ27Goo8NWmaO7pXelS5yyL3D3Q04AQjlS+5Lv d81T89tRlqgwQiLCT4SMrABpxNx+uPz8zfaIEqzcsRhm04ghyykwq6hX+KnLKOgT CAffoHJMgTm7eU0ulDiUiKne/jhifawodvjGH0sIOuF5pdwI5LsrOC2WduTDTIJY 2bL7P8r/0wPRPt+5nZMtkdXRiGPdHYPGsEm+AgYX6x3O6rr/EGoDBkJ9rtL+Otd7 ivOyoP/cAdeQS5u/AfkOJ+ol6rGTQfjnfcnyQ9or9PKGELNI5CP/1YV6IVhOzW5p 3vgb52m09CPZhKGcaTgAHqusNcqcoGBe9TQ== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeeffedrtdeggdehleekvdcutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecuuegr ihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenucfjug hrpeffhffvvefukfhfgggtuggjsehttdertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefrrghtrhhitghk ucfuthgvihhnhhgrrhguthcuoehpshesphhkshdrihhmqeenucggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpe evkeekfffhiedtleduiefgjedttedvledvudehgfeugedugffhueekhfejvdektdenucev lhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehpshesphhksh drihhmpdhnsggprhgtphhtthhopedujedpmhhouggvpehsmhhtphhouhhtpdhrtghpthht oheptgholhhlihhnrdhfuhhnkhdusehgmhgrihhlrdgtohhmpdhrtghpthhtoheptggsse dvheeisghithdrohhrghdprhgtphhtthhopehpihgvrhhrvgdqvghmmhgrnhhuvghlrdhp rghtrhihsegvmhgsvggtohhsmhdrtghomhdprhgtphhtthhopehsrghnuggrlhhssegtrh hushhthihtohhothhhphgrshhtvgdrnhgvthdprhgtphhtthhopehgihhtshhtvghrsehp ohgsohigrdgtohhmpdhrtghpthhtohepnhgvfihrvghnsehgmhgrihhlrdgtohhmpdhrtg hpthhtohepghhithesvhhgvghrrdhkvghrnhgvlhdrohhrghdprhgtphhtthhopegtohhn thgrtghtsehhrggtkhhtihhvihhsrdhmvgdprhgtphhtthhopehkrhhishhtohhffhgvrh hhrghughhssggrkhhksehfrghsthhmrghilhdrtghomh X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i197146af:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Tue, 23 Sep 2025 00:54:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPSA id c5f0ae43 (TLSv1.3:TLS_CHACHA20_POLY1305_SHA256:256:NO); Tue, 23 Sep 2025 04:54:48 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2025 06:54:45 +0200 From: Patrick Steinhardt To: Junio C Hamano Cc: "brian m. carlson" , SZEDER =?utf-8?B?R8OhYm9y?= , git@vger.kernel.org, "Haelwenn (lanodan) Monnier" , Ben Knoble , Christian Brabandt , Collin Funk , Eli Schwartz , Elijah Newren , Ezekiel Newren , Johannes Schindelin , Phillip Wood , Pierre-Emmanuel Patry , Sam James , Taylor Blau , Kristoffer Haugsbakk Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 7/9] BreakingChanges: announce Rust becoming mandatory Message-ID: References: <20250915-b4-pks-rust-breaking-change-v5-0-dc3a32fbb216@pks.im> <20250915-b4-pks-rust-breaking-change-v5-7-dc3a32fbb216@pks.im> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Mon, Sep 22, 2025 at 03:56:42PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > "brian m. carlson" writes: > >> As I already said a few times (e.g. ), I > >> feel that the timeline hinted by any of these documents that were > >> proposed is way too aggressive for affected people to practically > >> prepare for. > > > > I don't think it's substantially more aggressive than the > > interoperability code. Both are aggressive timelines, but getting LLVM > > ported to some of the affected targets isn't out of the question > > (especially since older versions of it supported some of those targets) > > and once that's done, I'm pretty sure Rust upstream would be on board > > with supporting those systems. > > Our timeline being agressive to cause more intense work on our > people is one thing. It does not make much sense to me to compare > it with the timeline being aggressive to others who do not control > our timeline. > > Putting it in another way, I'd call it hopelessly optimistic to > expect that those currently without Rust can somehow come up with a > plan to help their vendors (or they may be vendors themselves, then > convince their management) prepare their platforms to support Rust > within 18 months. And giving them ultimatum based on the optimism > was never my favorite part of this whole thing. We have made other breaking changes conditional on the wider ecosystem. For example, using reftable by default is conditioned on the ecosystem having catched up and supporting this new format. Do we maybe want to do the same with Rust? We can for example add something like the following paragraph: We will carefully evaluate the impact on downstream distributions before making Rust mandatory in Git 3.0. If we see that the impact on downstream distributions would be significant, we may decide to defer this breaking change. This will also take into account our own learnings with how painful it is to keep Rust an optional component. The intent would be to alert distributors, but not "blindly" pull the trigger. Instead, we should take a step back and evaluate both how the Rust ecosystem looks like at the Git 3.0 boundary and how painful it is for us to keep it as an optional component. Patrick