The Life and Death of an API

[aturon]

@huon

I wonder how crates.io plays into this: i.e. should we consider also explicitly/officially encouraging people to publish things on crates.io to get experience with the API? This clearly applies to the "close the PR" option, but may also be a desirable thing to do with RFCs (and maybe even unstable APIs?) to allow interested parties to try them in their own code, and get guidance from an implementation. (And, if the RFC is eventually rejected, the functionality still exists.)

Yes, this is definitely a question we need to consider as part of the policy here.

It's a bit complicated, since it touches on the much harder question of: in the long term, what should live in the standard library, in other rust-lang crates, and in crates.io? I'd like to start a separate thread about that soon, since it's an important strategic question for our library work going forward.