zlacker

I was thinking something along the lines of people who tend to set unusually high standards for themselves.

Rust has something of a self-image of always being best-of-breed in everything it attempts, so I could believe that it might be particularly attractive to those sorts.

Other possibilities might be that Rust developers skew younger than average (I don't know whether that's true), or that its six-week release cycle attracts people who think that a year is a long time.

>>mjw100+(OP)
rust definitely skews younger than average. i don't have statistics on hand, but almost all people i know working on the project are younger than 35, and a surprising number are 17-25

>>mjw100+(OP)
> people who tend to set unusually high standards for themselves

I would agree, at least I am like that when using Rust (though I don't contribute).

And it's true that this is a shortcut to burnout.

> or that its six-week release cycle attracts people who think that a year is a long time

I don't speak for the Rust project but to me this always sounded like a measure to avoid stagnation. Having six week slices helps remind people that this is not only a labor of love; many people out there are counting on you to get your stuff right.

Obviously Rust isn't governed like a commercial project (and thank the gods for that) and obviously many things still take years to complete but for me at least the six weeks release cycle would serve as a periodical poking a la "Hey, is your stuff progressing even a little?".

Don't know though, could be just my interpretation.

>>pdimit+k1
From the outside, the Rust project seems to be governed like a government project. Is that markedly better?

Linux shows us at least one way to run a successful long term project. What is their governance model?

>>darthr+7h
Wish I had an answer.