They're full time developers exclusively for git? How long have they been doing this? What is the set of their contributions to date? Of the total set of developers how many of them want this?

Is their set of desires anything more than "lets use Rust?" Is there a specific set of new functionality that would depend on it? New use cases that could be served with it? Is there even a long term plan for "new new C code" at some date?

I sense disaster fomented by poorly articulated goals.

> Also, there's already a separate from-scratch re-implementation of git in Rust (gitoxide).

Sounds perfect. Then each project can maintain the focus on their core language and not potentially take several steps backwards by hacking two incompatible pieces together with no roadmap.

There are people who take "Rust evangelism" to a level that few other languages have witnessed. In the old days you could find serious arguments that not using Rust was akin to violating human rights by a series of absurd extensions. It is unusual and it is remarkable.

> A lot of these suggestions are coming from people who have significant experience with unsafe languages and are sick of having to keep dealing with them.

And my commentary is coming from experience in codebases that try to "modernize" themselves incrementally, particularly, open source code bases. I would love a 100% Rust git replacement. The idea of slowly subsuming Rust into C git feels like a distracting and misplaced effort.