I think some `submodule` idea combined with a removal of the "forwarding requirement" is the best way to do it but this needs an RFC. I'm not convinced that more visibility rules would change the language for the better.
- Does Nim need package-level visibility? zahary
- Re: Does Nim need package-level visibility? jester
- Re: Does Nim need package-level visibility? nepeckman
- Re: Does Nim need package-level visibility? zahary
- Re: Does Nim need package-level visibility? nepeckman
- Re: Does Nim need package-level visibili... yglukhov
- Re: Does Nim need package-level visi... arnetheduck
- Re: Does Nim need package-level ... Araq
- Re: Does Nim need package-level ... dom96
- Re: Does Nim need package-level ... arnetheduck
- Re: Does Nim need package-level ... timothee
- Re: Does Nim need package-level ... andrea
- Re: Does Nim need package-level ... Chris660
- Re: Does Nim need package-level ... zahary
- Re: Does Nim need package-level ... sendell