Nope. Literally no distro is going to deal with updating random language toolchains in an LTS release. The risk of bugs and breakage is too high. The existence of LTS releases means users want software that doesn't need non-security updates frequently. https://twitter.com/BRIAN_____/status/1057096785653510150 …
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @bk2204
What do they do when nobody helps them maintain those old versions of the old packages?
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @BRIAN_____
They usually do it themselves, or they choose not to ship that language or any program written in it.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @bk2204 @BRIAN_____
As a developer, my projects specify support for a certain set of OSes, including LTS support, so I am interested in having a set of Rust releases that are LTS supported.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
Replying to @BRIAN_____
Unfortunately, since these are free time open-source projects and not my job, I'm unable to pay people to do the work. My employer doesn't use Rust.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
Replying to @BRIAN_____
I would donate to a fund that supported that work as part of a group, but as an individual, I am not financially able to employ full time staff.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @bk2204 @BRIAN_____
Most language communities agree on a few significant stable releases that third parties can coalesce around and companies can maintain and support, even if upstream does not. Rust is generally an exception in that regard.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
The Rust toolchain teams do a good job of maintaining backward compatibility. Some times some crates have to be manually tweaked to support the newest release but that's nothing compared to the cost of maintaining support for old toolchain versions.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.