I agree with you both.
Users would love to have a project with multi-year maintenance with a
completely stable backwards compatible API (aka what tokio has promised)
that does everything they need.
However, building such software is (very) costly both initially and then
much more so for the
Hi,
Thanks for the detailed answer.
In contrast to my previous email, my opinionated part:
Generally I like the idea of smaller crates, it helps with a lot of stuff
(different targets, build time), but those benefits can be achieved by
feature gates too.
The upside would be out-of-sync crate
Hi,
Thanks for your input.
Every time there is a new major release, all new development shifts towards
that new API and users of previous APIs are left behind. It is not just a
matter of SemVer and size of version numbers, there is a whole development
shift to be on top of the new API.
I
