The PR debacle


Sorry, I did not cherry-pick one part to erase rest of your post. I just didn’t want to repeat @vitalyd’s response and engage in tit-for-tat argument.

I do appreciate work made on the site. The content changes are overall very positive.


Rust-the-language also has the sensible release train model, so that features can be published when they’re ready and not before.

I suspect the underlying cause of the troubles with this update is the decision to both make a big-bang change of the whole site, and do it with a fixed deadline.

Either of those decisions would be reasonable on their own; it’s the combination that’s gone wrong.


The new website is now online on I’m glad that some of the issues have been resolved – for instance, the text size has been improved. However, there are still major problems:

  • The code samples are lacking text contrast and syntax highlighting. Nobody wants to read code without syntax highlighting.
  • The website is not available in other languages, unlike the old website.
  • I can’t find the link “See who’s using Rust” anywhere.
  • Google Search still finds old links that now lead to a 404 error. It wouldn’t be too hard to redirect old links to the new, valid links.
  • The link “Looking for the previous website?” is dead ATM. fixed

Also got a visual overhaul, also with some issues:

  • Blog posts don’t have the word “Blog” in the header, so they are indistinguishable from the main website.
  • Blog posts are also lacking syntax highlighting.
  • Most links in the footer are dead.
  • The headline font in blog posts is way too bold (800 instead of 400).
  • The design of the blog is a few pull requests behind the main page (e.g. font size and social icons in the footer)

Why couldn’t the release wait until some of these issues are resolved and the website is properly tested?


I really like the compromise/improvement they made on the slogan :slight_smile:

Empowering everyone to build reliable and efficient software.

It’s got both the “empowerment” thing and includes two technical selling points, without the somewhat vague term “systems programming” and also without using terms that may not be understandable/relevant to everyone (e.g. “data races”).


Please file issues, some of these have already been filed.

Why? Well, everyone has been burning the candle at both ends to ship the edition, for months. Some small stuff will be than less than ideal at first. We’ll work through them. The blog also suffered from the same maintenance issues as the website. There’s some stuff to be fixed, but it’s already in a better overall place.


Appreciate you guys for incorporating some of the feedback in the version that’s gone live. The new slogan is not a great copy per se, but is a definite improvement over the previous (beta) one. Overall a step in the right direction. Kudos to whoever worked to make this possible :+1: .

Now when are we getting the code samples back? :stuck_out_tongue:


I highly agree with this. The first thing I want to see when I’m checking out a new language is some code, but I couldn’t find code anywhere on the page. Even after clicking on the largest “Get Started” button I didn’t see any code. I had to scroll 3 pages down to find “A small Rust application”. I think that this, or some other piece of code, should have been on the front page.

It feels to me as if the people designed the new Rust page try to target audience which is not developers.

I also miss the highlighted Safety and Fearless concurrency that were on the old page (Maybe I remember incorrectly?). These are stuff to write home about, to show off to your friends.

Just my 2/cents.

EDIT: I just looked at the old website again.
I still remember the first time I learned about Rust and entered this page. The page says:
" Rust is a systems programming language that runs blazingly fast, prevents segfaults, and guarantees thread safety."

I remember how excited I was when reading this in the toilet on my mobile phone.

Prevents segfaults? I used to be an assembly developer. I had segfauls all my life up until that point. I had to know how one can prevent them. guarantees thread safety? I thought that this was impossible up until then. I didn’t know at the time what “zero cost abstractions” meant for Rust, but I knew immediately what this should mean. This means that I could have nice code abstractions that still run fast.

Those were the things most important for me, but I can’t find any of them on the new page, or they are mentioned in very small letters. From my point of view these are the things that will make developers want to use Rust.


FWIW, the specific phrase “eliminate segfaults” isn’t on the page, but “memory-safety and thread-safety” are: they’re in one of the first blocks on the page, in larger text than they were on the old website. :slight_smile:


Has anyone noticed that the new beta site doesn’t really say “Programming Language” anywhere?


I do want to applaud the team for their responsiveness to issues and PRs. I may still have issues with lots of the design choices, but the effort and diligence they have exhibited is commendable.


There’s support for using MicroPython on ESP8266. As much as I don’t like it there are a number of people using python for their IoT projects on a low cost micro


To give some context here, I wouldn’t have posted this issue if it wasn’t clear to me that there is an accessibility issue here, not just a stylistic one. People have used terms like “uncomfortable”, “difficult” and even “nauseous”. I know it’s easy to dismiss claims like this when one doesn’t suffer the same thing themselves, but if people are asking for an alternative version for autistic people it seems clear to me that the current website is simply not working for some fraction of the userbase. To me this goes beyond bikeshedding, YMMV.

On the other hand, a lot of the reaction I’ve seen has made me uncomfortable. I don’t think it’s appropriate to aggressively advertise opinions here, or try to argue points that the authors don’t want to argue about. Generally speaking, if you don’t have opinions that haven’t been seen before, you are applying pressure rather than giving advice, and I don’t really feel that’s fair.


Someone opened a thread about this yesterday on the subreddit (they were unaware of this one). The thread became rather big, and i thought maybe some of you may be interested in reading it, so here’s the link:


accessibility issue here, not just a stylistic one

This to me just seems really inconsistent, since the new website is trying to go for a theme of empowerment and inclusion, yet choosing to ignore feedback indicating the new website fails to support or include categories of people.

As a side note, I feel very similarly about the push to move everything from IRC to Discord, a platform with fairly serious known accessibility problems. However, I’m not sure it’s really appropriate to discuss that on this thread.

Aside from that, the thing that bothers me most is that the response to most serious negative feedback (on Github as well as everywhere else) is “we already have discussed this please stop talking”. I may just not be looking hard enough, but I have yet to see any real discussion that involves anybody who is involved in maintaining the new website that dosen’t get shut down immediately with “we already discussed this”.

It seems a little frustrating to me that any form of larger scale feedback or requests for change get shut down instantly, but any request for a pointer to previous discussion gets ignored. I would be pretty satisfied with an answer like “we already discussed this but it wasn’t public and we aren’t going to make it public”, but instead there is never a direct response.

And again, while subjective design feedback is important and should be considered, I think accessibility feedback is on an entirely different level and the fact that the website maintainers seem to be grouping these together as not being worthy of their time and effort to consider or respond to feels very insulting.


Moderator note: I’d like to encourage everyone to reflect on what their commentary adds to this discussion. Please try to remain constructive. Unstructured commentary that only serves to encourage off topic discussion will be removed. If you have questions about our moderation, please email the Rust moderators at