OK, I've taken the bold step of scheduling rand for 7/25 (which means we have to kick-start that evaluation next week).
I'm going to suggest that our disposition here with rand should be to polish it and release 1.0, limiting ambitious design changes. rand has been the subject of a lot of criticism over the years, and has suffered from not having a dedicated maintainer, but rand is also the best way we have to get random numbers today, and it's just fine at that. There's going to be a strong temptation to not settle on good enough, and demand a complete redesign, but the fact is that has not happened in the years people have been wanting it. There's plenty we can do to improve the crate we actually have, and we should do that.
So let's do a thorough review, and be cognizant of scoping the resultant work to what we can reasonably accomplish now, and what we can accomplish later.
Perhaps getting out a limited-ambition rand 1.0 will inspire someone to come along and design a better rand, and that can become rand 2.0, or it will deprecate rand. Let's give it a shot and see what happens.
We need somebody to lead this evaluation. Anybody interested?
cc @bstrie I know you've talked about working on rand recently.