yes, they are allowed, however I totes understand the POV of the folks who say no
Rust folks: In your opinion, are libraries allowed to increase their minimum supported version of Rust without a semver major bump? (Considering that updating stable versions of Rust should never be difficult)
-
-
-
I kinda want to open an RFC to amend #1105 to say this explicitly.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
In my view, no. I see it as a breaking change if it causes current legitimate usage to break, even if remediation is simple and straight forward.
-
That's true of many things that are considered fine by RFC 1105
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I think they can, yes.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Yes. I think it helps if you write something in the docs or README along the lines of "we aim to support the latest stable Rust and so you will in some rare circumstances need to upgrade to that in order to continue to use this crate." (Tailored to your crate of course)
-
If I'm not mistaken, epochs may help with this? Not sure how granular that will be.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I’m on the “no” side. Upgrading Rust might not be possible for many reasons out of our hands. (OS packaging, policies, etc…)
-
The policies is what makes the most sense to me. Some departments will bless certain versions of software that have made it through testing, audit, verification or legal. While upgrading rustc is nbd for a lot of us, it can be for safety critical projects
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
I guess it depends in which way cargo enforces the minimum rust version. If it semver drifts into incompatibility that seems bad, but if it stopped at the last compatible version...
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.