-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 299
[WIP] Add an Inside Rust blog post for stage 0 std redesign #1582
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
Hi @senekor, do you know what this zola failure is? Or am I missing sth in the front-matter?
I guess I'm missing a |
Yes, the path key is required. The format has to be "YYYY/MM/DD/whatever-you-want". I'll try to improve the templates so they produce better error messages in this case. |
Oh if it's an inside-rust post, that should be in the path as well. So: "inside-rust/YYYY/MM/DD/whatever". If the date of publication is not yet known, it's recommended to use the placeholder "9999/12/31" as the date, CI will prevent that from being published accidentally. I can definitely improve docs/guidance/tooling/error msgs here. |
@@ -0,0 +1,54 @@ | |||
+++ | |||
path = "inside-rust/9999/12/31/redesigning-stage-0-std" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
FIXME(jieyouxu): update this date when we're ready
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Great work!
Just two suggestions in addition to my minor notes:
-
It'd be helpful to mention the implementation PR.
-
Consider showing the staging diagram to illustrate how things looked before and how they look now (the updated version is in the implementation PR).
I have no idea how I didn't include that when I even remember telling myself not to forget that lmao |
7e0d43d
to
c8bc2d5
Compare
c8bc2d5
to
222f4fe
Compare
Changes since last review (in round 2 222f4fe):
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
TODO: include pre/post CLI invocations and compare their behavioral differences.
Notably,
./x build library --stage 0
(no-op in post) and./x build library
(0 pre, 1 post)./x build library --stage 0
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
TODO: having someone on t-libs and someone on t-compiler skim it and sign off that it makes sense
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
TODO: move motivation section towards the end
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
TODO: create two dedicated bootstrap support threads (or just one?) and link to them from this blog post
- For general inqueries (why we're doing this?)
- For helping with issues and bugs
Tip
There are intentionally a lot of WIP intermediate commits for review purposes, I will rebase once the content is ready.
Accompanying blog post for:
r? @onur-ozkan (and @Mark-Simulacrum)
cc @rust-lang/bootstrap (significant stage 0 bootstrap changes)
Rendered