Wow, this thread is wild. It’s like everyone’s losing their minds over mixing Rust into our old, battle-tested C kernel. Sure, Rust promises a ton of safety benefits and could really help keep nasty bugs at bay, but some folks are super worried that every time a C API changes, the Rust side will break—and then someone’s stuck fixing it. It’s as if everyone’s saying, “We’re cool with experimenting, but don’t force us into a multi-language mess we didn’t sign up for.”<p>What really gets me is the whole leadership vibe. If Linus had just clearly said, “Alright, Rust is in, but only in these specific parts and under these conditions,” a lot of this back-and-forth and social media shouting would’ve been avoided. Instead, we’ve got a bunch of maintainers arguing about process and even threatening to use social media to shame people, which just adds more fuel to the fire.<p>At the end of the day, it’s not as simple as “Rust or no Rust.” Some parts of the kernel might really benefit from Rust’s safety, while other parts might be fine sticking to C. The real challenge is figuring out how to integrate Rust without turning everything into a maintenance nightmare. We’re all aiming for a better, more robust kernel here, but if we keep getting bogged down in personal drama and endless debates about process, nobody wins. Maybe it’s time to take a deep breath, set some clear rules, and move on instead of letting all this online drama derail progress.