On Tue, Sep 09, 2025 at 10:12:39AM +0100, Phillip Wood wrote: > On 05/09/2025 15:28, Patrick Steinhardt wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 05, 2025 at 03:14:25PM +0100, Phillip Wood wrote: > > > > > > It looks like this version does include the necessary Makefile changes which > > > is great. I do think though, that for the test balloon to be valuable, we > > > need make building with rust the default with an error message that tells > > > people how to build without rust if that fails. Otherwise it is easy for > > > people building on platforms without rust support to miss that we're going > > > to be making it mandatory soon. > > > > I have a plan layed out in the BreakingChanges document that mentions > > how I'm proposing to do the transition: > > > > 1. We introduce it with auto-detection for Meson and default-disabled > > for our Makefile in Git 2.52. > > I'm not sure how much this helps us. You've said elsewhere that you don't > want to be inundated with bug reports which is fair enough, but I'm fairly > skeptical that we're going to get enough people enabling this get a useful > amount of early feedback. So I wonder if it would be better just to bite the > bullet and enable it by default from the start. I think I saw Elijah making > a similar argument elsewhere in this thread. The patch series may not be ready for all platforms yet though. Windows support is still untested and probably not working, so I first need to get that done. This is basically the reason why I'm proposing to have it auto-detected at first: I want to be able to iterate without breaking any platforms yet. How about we do a compromise: we initially introduce it default-disabled, but default-enable it in the next release already instead of first tying it to `-Dbreaking_changes=true`? That would accelerate the proposed timeline a bit. Patrick
