wedson

To be clear, I still think it's fine for Wedson to inform him even if the document is not a normative reference/specification?

A bit more was discussed in this[1] article as well about Wedson Almeida Filho leaving.

TL;DW Linux kernel graybeards live bike-shed a presentation by Kent Overstreet and Wedson Almeida Filho.

Really no need for such dramatic convulsions, Linus, where Wedson was simply trying to explain the API expectations of the Rust language.

The hate and vitriol has chased away Wedson Almeida Filho, Alex Gaynor, Hector Martin and Christoph Hellwig from the Rust in Linux project.

Re: 1, it's a few nice sentences about Wedson after he leaves.

It's a shame for sure that Wedson burned out and left.

If you watch the video Wedson linked to in his email, you will see a fragment of the typical experience of a Linux Rust kernel maintainer.

After Wedson Almeida Filho stepped down last year as a Rust co-maintainer, this now leaves Rust For Linux project leader Miguel Ojeda as the sole official maintainer of the code while there are several Rust code reviewers.

It's only relevant to the current debate in the sense that that event was the trigger for Wedson (the first and OG R4L project contributor) to quit, which was only a few months ago, so it's a fresh wound marinating in the background while essentially the same drama unfolds all over again.

I just ran out of steam to deal with them, as I said in my email." I'm not surprised Wedson feels this way.

But the wrong response in my view is to answer with another stupid argument ("The Rust community is the problem.") Was Wedson acting in an untoward way here that in some way exemplifies something significant about the Rust community?

I wrote the document, but I never resigned since I started the project -- you are probably referring to Wedson.

Wedson had been working in the kernel for 4.5 years!

I said Ted not taking his concerns directly to project leadership (Linus), and instead directing his ire at Wedson, was passive aggressive.