I was quite confused, and I think all this redundant information makes a poor experience.
In any case, we have no guidelines for crate READMEs, and since this is a crucial part of the documentation UI, it seems like we must establish some, then go back and review the crates we’ve done. cc @dtolnay
I’ve just discovered that docs.rs displays a crate’s GitHub README
I would just like to note that this has nothing directly to do with GitHub (it just happens to be the same in approximately 100% of the cases), if you were to have a package with the source hosted elsewhere it should work just the same. Judging by this code from docs.rs it is based on the package.readme key in the packages Cargo.toml + a default if not specified, as described in The Manifest Format:
# This points to a file in the repository (relative to this `Cargo.toml`). The
# contents of this file are stored and indexed in the registry.
readme = "..."
I needed a parser, looked at many of them and wasn’t satisfied with either, but I agree it is a relatively niche tool.
However I would like to nominate some more XML-related crates. I see xml (should be xml-rs?) is already in, but some DOM should also be included. I see a couple of candidates for that: sxd-document (+sxd-xpath), minidom, elementtree, rquery, treexml, xmltree. They are mostly equivalent, so some should be chosen.
The walkdir crate is scheduled for 6/13, has no assigned lead, and I do want to start getting these evaluations going more weeks in advance. I know we’ve only had one round to crib off of so far (log, but if anybody has an inclination to lead the walkdir evaluation, I can help walk them through the evolving process. I’ll be on vacation next week, but the one following we can get started. Alternately, if somebody is up to getting walkdir started next week @dtolnay can assist.
@dtolnay will be starting the reqwest evaluation soon.
The walkdir review is scheduled for 6/13, and the intent is to start evaluations one month ahead of time, so it’s behind schedule. It still doesn’t have a lead assigned. Is anybody interested in leading the walkdir evaluation, starting this week? It doesn’t require a great deal of experience, since the entire process is outlined in the checklist, and there are previous examples to crib off of.
If not, I will begin the walkdir evaluation on Friday.
The error-chain review is scheduled for 6/27, which means @aturon needs to get that evaluation rolling soon as well.