Nothing much has been written up yet, but what I’m hoping to see includes:
- Drastically simplifying the story around
Remote, potentially providing global event loops and the like.
- Focusing Tokio more purely on “mid-level” async IO, rather than the current focus on tokio-proto; essentially, breaking up the stack a bit to have greater focus for each piece.
- A complete revamp of the documentation, in line with the above, and also providing reams of examples.
- As part of this, I’d like to see some documentation introducing futures via
await syntax to start.
I’m not sure how all of this is going to turn out, but these are at least the high level concerns I have in mind. More details around the impl period!
I think that’s not the right way to understand what’s happening; there’s been quite substantial focus on implementation work throughout the year (e.g. on incremental compilation, NLL, library work, etc). To me, it’s more a matter of having a clear cutoff point for major RFCs that will “make it” for the year, and providing an opportunity for us as a community to change gears for a bit.
By contrast, closing down the RFC process for more than a quarter of the year feels a bit too strong to me.
But in any case, we’ll know more by the end of the year, and can take that into account when planning next year!
So the team roadmap issues have not been kept up to date. By contrast, the project roadmap issues (e.g. ergonomics) has been.
On the whole, I’d say that the tracking repository has been a mixed experience, and we may want to try a different approach next year.
Roadmap items are prioritized, but we continually accept other RFCs and stabilizations. I think
TryFrom is plausible, but the never type is less likely this year (because it hit on substantial thorny implementation issues, and does not merit the time needed at this point).
Hm, so to clarify, the impl period is about implementation, and very much not stabilization! As I said above, it’s a misunderstanding to think we’ve waited until this point to do any implementation work; it’s been happening continuously. This is more about recognizing a point in the year where further design work on the roadmap is no longer feasible, and we should focus wholly on completing implementation work that was already ongoing.
With respect to the timeline: certainly going forward I would expect to have more of the “seasons” of the year set in advance. The idea of the impl period was something that occurred to us relatively recently, hence the somewhat late announcement. As with all Rust processes, expect iteration and experimentation!
Yes, in general the RFC process is currently calibrated too far on the waterfall side. That’s one among many improvements that’d be good to make around RFCs going into next year.