Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Jul 24 2026 at 15:44): Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Jul 24 2026 at 15:44):dev-er1 opened PR #13956 from dev-er1:make-dev-mode-configurable to bytecodealliance:main:
This addresses the existing
TODO(mbm): configurable dev mode.This change makes the explorer's development mode configurable via a
--devcommand-line flag.Previously, development mode was always enabled, causing the explorer to always create a symlink to the assets directory. With this change, development mode is enabled only when
--devis specified, while the default behavior embeds and writes the assets as intended for normal use.
Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Jul 24 2026 at 15:44):dev-er1 requested cfallin for a review on PR #13956.
Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Jul 24 2026 at 15:44):dev-er1 requested wasmtime-compiler-reviewers for a review on PR #13956.
Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Jul 24 2026 at 15:49):dev-er1 converted PR #13956 Make dev mode configurable to a draft.
Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Jul 24 2026 at 15:51):dev-er1 updated PR #13956.
Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Jul 24 2026 at 15:54):dev-er1 updated PR #13956.
Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Jul 24 2026 at 15:54):dev-er1 has marked PR #13956 as ready for review.
Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Jul 24 2026 at 16:17):cfallin commented on PR #13956:
@dev-er1 can you say a bit more what your goals are here? I ask in the context of our trivial-change policy: you had a PR just now that was a small refactor, that was closed; now almost right away you've sent another PR in an unrelated part of the code addressing a trivial TODO.
Are you using the Cranelift verification infrastructure? Did you run into a case where you needed to enable/disable this mode via the command line?
To summarize the policy for this case: I don't think this meets the bar for use of our time unless you are actively using and working with the verification infrastructure and are interested in becoming a regular contributor. Please let us know if that's the case and we're happy to talk more (and in fact curious to know how you're using it). Thanks!
Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Jul 24 2026 at 16:27):dev-er1 commented on PR #13956:
Thanks for the review and for explaining the policy.
I haven't used the Cranelift verification infrastructure yet. My goal is to start contributing to open source, and I chose Wasmtime because I'm interested in Rust and systems programming. I'm still learning the codebase, so I looked for small issues to get familiar with the contribution process.
I understand your policy on trivial changes. I'll focus on issues that provide more value and require a better understanding of the project.
Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Jul 24 2026 at 17:02):cfallin commented on PR #13956:
OK, thanks. We're happy to help folks get started. In my experience at least it works best when you have a goal in mind (e.g., make X use-case with Wasmtime work well, or improve performance on Y) and can see progress toward that, rather than doing trivial random changes that don't actually matter for something you want to do. (That's a way to get familiar with the process itself, but the real value is low.) I'll also note that we're much more sensitive to the social dynamics here than we were, say, a year ago (drive-by LLM contributions have poisoned the well) but we're happy to work with real humans that have real goals and want to learn.
I'll go ahead and close this but feel free to poke around with Wasmtime/Cranelift and improve anything that you like there -- we haven't done a good job of curating good-first-issues but refining performance or adding functionality where it's missing is always a good bet. Thanks!
Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Jul 24 2026 at 17:02)::cross_mark: cfallin closed without merge PR #13956.
Last updated: Jul 29 2026 at 05:03 UTC