Who defines "official?"

Re. this post: What makes something an "official Rust project?" What individual or committee ultimately decides which projects get to be official? Is officialness accompanied by funding, or is it merely an endorsement?

I'm confused about the difference between the Rust Foundation, Rust Core Team, and the entire Governance page. While the emphasis on community is appreciated, some clarity on who's empowered to make what decisions, and by whom, would be helpful. I'm looking for something more concrete and less collectivist than "the consent of the governed," or "anyone can participate."

Thanks in advance for any clarity you can offer.

As far as I'm aware, "Official Rust Project" means its code lives in the rust-lang github organization, though I may be mistaken.

As to who gets to decide what's official and what isn't, I'm not sure.

I think it's largely around distribution and guarantees. You can look at clippy and rustfmt, for example, for things in the past that have made the transition from "a thing that lots of people use" to "something that's tested in the rust CI and included in the rust dist builds".

There's certainly no guarantee of funding. With the foundation existing it's possible that going forward it will be easier to get funding from the foundation for things that are official, but I don't know that that's a requirement at all. There are many well-known and important ecosystem crates which are not "official" but which I personally would have no issue with the foundation funding. (For clarity, I have no decision-making powers for what the foundation funds.)

3 Likes

Thanks. Any idea who makes those decisions? rust-analyzer is "official" now according to whomever writes blog.rust-lang.org, but there's no by-line on the announcement post. There's so much stuff about being "communal," but somebody clearly has authority to add things to the rust-lang GitHub organization (where rust-analyzer is not currently hosted), the Rust CI and dist builds you mentioned, the rust-lang.org blog, etc. I guess my next stop is to contact contributors to the open source portions of the Rust ecosystem; but I sure wish so much of this stuff wasn't being steered by hard-to-identify parties claiming their actions somehow represent the will of the people.

UPDATE: The blog is maintained in a Git repo with a reasonable commit history. The original author of that post appears to be @matklad.

Big things are the FCP RFC process. You can see the decision to make this the PoR in RFC 2912.

Thank you. By "the FCP process," do you mean the RFC process? I'm used to FCP meaning "Final Comment Period." What is a PoR?

Yes I did. Sorry for the typo. (FCP is one step of the RFC process.)

PoR = Plan of Record.

1 Like

This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. We invite you to open a new topic if you have further questions or comments.