Brainstorm with me. How plausible is it for quickcheck to break ties with rand?https://github.com/BurntSushi/quickcheck/issues/241 …
Commenting here since it's tangential, and I don't want to derail your issue, but I think we really need to decide as a community what we consider to be the norm for compiler version support. I think we can be more aggressive than other langs, but different crates have diff needs
-
-
I'm wary about basing this on what versions ship with os distros since it takes that choice away from our community (even if it's relevant to things like eg ripgrep). Could argue that folks who can't upgrade compiler versions don't necessarily need the latest version of an app
-
At the same time, I think we can all agree that libs only supporting latest stable is bad for the ecosystem. Foundational libs should probably be more conservative (realising you are one is hard. Is diesel a foundational lib?)
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
I agree. To be clear though, if it were only about MSRV, I could overlook that, at least for rand. I still like the LTS idea that boats/aturon proposed. It provides a rallying point. Adding MSRV to Cargo.toml in order to improve failure modes is also a good start.
-
LTS RFC is definitely the most compelling solution I've seen so far. I also agree adding this to Cargo.toml would be great, especially if it affected version resolution
- 9 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Any minimum compiler version bump should be a breaking change IMO.
-
Yeah, I'm aware of those opinons, and I generally disagree. It leans too far in the direction of stagnation. Plus, this is generaly, AFAIK, not something other projects treat as a breaking change in other ecosystems.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
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.