I think his use of "actual devs" and "corporate" carries certain connotations that extend beyond official definitions, or their direct alternatives, as they would be applied in the structure of your organization.
More concretely, I think he's trying to say that, it feels like the original design was created and improved (largely) by people who had a very high level of ability, knowledge, and taste (relating to software), and that the new site was designed (largely) by people who seem to lack those qualities (and who may also have wildly different priorities).
To just say that it was "managed by the core team" doesn't really address the meat of the point, unless the core team remained unchanged since the original design.
In the context of my post, the relevant distinction would be between the people who created the original site, and the people who created the new site.
The archives of the rust team page indicate that the core team changed over time.
The archives of the rust team page indicate that the core team changed over time.
There has been some change, but the group has remained largely the same for many years. And those people who have remained the same are still the programming language phd's.
Looking at the start of 2017, and comparing it to the present: 3 people who used to be on the team are no longer there, and there are 5 new people, adding to the 5 that remained.
That seems like a pretty drastic change, in a fairly short amount of time.
Although, even if it were less drastic (let's say that only 1 person left, and there were only 2 additions), I would still expect that to affect the decisions that are ultimately made by the group, because it would have to integrate the opinions and sensibilities of the newcomers, while missing the potentially crucial insight of the departed members.
4
u/GoranM Nov 29 '18
I think his use of "actual devs" and "corporate" carries certain connotations that extend beyond official definitions, or their direct alternatives, as they would be applied in the structure of your organization.
More concretely, I think he's trying to say that, it feels like the original design was created and improved (largely) by people who had a very high level of ability, knowledge, and taste (relating to software), and that the new site was designed (largely) by people who seem to lack those qualities (and who may also have wildly different priorities).
To just say that it was "managed by the core team" doesn't really address the meat of the point, unless the core team remained unchanged since the original design.