On Wed, Nov 07, 2018 at 11:07:09AM -0800, Josh Triplett wrote: > Rust is stable. Thank you for your contributions helping it work on more > architectures, but "does not have first-tier support for every > architecture ever" is not a component of "stabilize". Hello Josh, I can't speak for anyone except myself. I just want to call attention to what I think might be part of the communication disconnect I see here. Debian allows different amounts of test failures based on architecture: https://sources.debian.org/src/rustc/1.31.0%7Ebeta.4+dfsg1-1%7Eexp2/debian/rules/#L210 Ubuntu runs the tests but doesn't fail the build if any fail: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/rustc/1.29.2+dfsg1+llvm-0ubuntu1 Fedora appears to run the tests but doesn't fail the build if any fail: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rust/blob/master/f/rust.spec#_573 SUSE appears to skip the tests: https://build.opensuse.org/package/view_file/openSUSE:Factory/rust/rust.spec?expand=1 (no "x.py tests" anyway) Gentoo appears to skip the tests: https://gitweb.gentoo.org/repo/gentoo.git/tree/dev-lang/rust/rust-1.29.2.ebuild (no "x.py tests" anyway) Arch appears to skip the tests: https://git.archlinux.org/svntogit/community.git/tree/trunk/PKGBUILD?h=packages/rust (no "x.py tests" anyway) Thus I suggest that "Rust has regressions" and "Rust isn't stable" reflects the frustrations of the packagers who have decided that Rust's tests are more annoying than they are useful. It doesn't help that the distributions in general want to support Firefox on more platforms than the Rust team supports as tier-1 platforms. A constant cadence of updates every six weeks is faster than anything else excepting the Linux kernel. It's a lot of work. Thanks
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature