leandron commented on PR #14094:
URL: https://github.com/apache/tvm/pull/14094#issuecomment-1441490163

   I've been following all these discussions about the Rust API proposed 
improvements and I'm surprised by how this is being dealt with.
   
   The disagreement seems to be on the way files are named, and the blocking 
request is to make it explicit the proposed changes *only* applies to embedded 
devices and (subject to confirmation) not doing that would have a detrimental 
effect in causing confusion to developers.
   
   My Rust knowledge is quite basic, so I'd like to understand how the proposed 
change is *only* applicable for embedded use cases, that it is being required 
to be explicitly named this way. Names of things are very subjective, unless we 
have some written naming convention written somewhere, which I'm not aware of.
   
   I guess the important question is: @Mousius is there something proposed here 
that fundamentally only applies to **embedded** Rust? If not, then I think the 
proposed patch is fine to be approved and merged, and we should proceed this 
way.
   
   As we've been discussing a lot recently in the threads (e.g. Unity) and in 
the forum (e.g. [Code Review Guidelines 
thread](https://discuss.tvm.apache.org/t/reminder-of-our-code-review-guidelines/14388/11)),
 the argumentation line of trusting, empowering the community and welcoming 
ideas seems to be conditionally applicable to some proposals and not others. 
This is one case it seems we are not applying those, therefore, letting 
contributors down and making them less inclined to make future contributions.
   
   So I suggest in the current direction of being welcoming and empowering the 
community to take decisions, that we accept and iterate over the proposed API, 
and in case we notice it is causing confusion to developers, we re-evaluate.


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]

Reply via email to