docs: Provide pointers for MSRV #13056
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
In today's cargo team meeting, we discussed the Pre-RFC for MSRV-aware resolver. In that discussion, the question of recommending a policy came up. While we didn't feel the ecosystem has coalesced enough to set one (and we hope MSRV-aware resolver will avoid the need), it became clear that some we can provide some basic help to the user, including - Raising awareness of tools to find the actual MSRV - The policy that they should verify it with examples on how to do so While this recommends some specific third-party tools, I'm not aware of other tools within this for us to worry about at this time for us to create any guidelines on which we should include.
|
r? @ehuss (rustbot has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
rustbot
added
A-documenting-cargo-itself
weihanglo
reviewed
Nov 28, 2023
epage
force-pushed
the
msrv
branch
2 times, most recently
from
3cc9586
to
a0c4a4c
Compare
weihanglo
approved these changes
Nov 28, 2023
|
@bors r+ |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
|
☀️ Test successful - checks-actions |
matthiaskrgr
added a commit
to matthiaskrgr/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 29, 2023
Update cargo 7 commits in 9b13310ca596020a737aaa47daa4ed9ff8898a2f..26333c732095d207aa05932ce863d850fb309386 2023-11-24 16:20:51 +0000 to 2023-11-28 20:07:39 +0000 - docs: link to the packages lint table from the related workspace table (rust-lang/cargo#13057) - Add more doc comments for gc changes. (rust-lang/cargo#13055) - docs: Provide pointers for MSRV (rust-lang/cargo#13056) - Fixed typo in SemVer Compatibility documentation page (rust-lang/cargo#13054) - refactor: use custom error instead of anyhow (rust-lang/cargo#13050) - review and remove ignored tests in rustfix (rust-lang/cargo#13047) - docs: add doc comments for rustfix (rust-lang/cargo#13048) r? ghost
rust-timer
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 29, 2023
Rollup merge of rust-lang#118425 - weihanglo:update-cargo, r=weihanglo Update cargo 7 commits in 9b13310ca596020a737aaa47daa4ed9ff8898a2f..26333c732095d207aa05932ce863d850fb309386 2023-11-24 16:20:51 +0000 to 2023-11-28 20:07:39 +0000 - docs: link to the packages lint table from the related workspace table (rust-lang/cargo#13057) - Add more doc comments for gc changes. (rust-lang/cargo#13055) - docs: Provide pointers for MSRV (rust-lang/cargo#13056) - Fixed typo in SemVer Compatibility documentation page (rust-lang/cargo#13054) - refactor: use custom error instead of anyhow (rust-lang/cargo#13050) - review and remove ignored tests in rustfix (rust-lang/cargo#13047) - docs: add doc comments for rustfix (rust-lang/cargo#13048) r? ghost
26 tasks
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What does this PR try to resolve?
In today's cargo team meeting, we discussed the Pre-RFC for MSRV-aware resolver for #9930.
In that discussion, the question of recommending a policy came up. While we didn't feel the ecosystem has coalesced enough to set one (and we hope MSRV-aware resolver will avoid the need),
it became clear that some we can provide some basic help to the user, including
How should we test and review this PR?
While this recommends some specific third-party tools, I'm not aware of other tools within this for us to worry about at this time for us to create any guidelines on which we should include.
Explanations are given for the example CI job to discourage cargo culting and instead give people the information they need in making decisions relevant to their project.
Additional information
I'd love to provide information to help users create their own MSRV policy but only if there was an automated way of collecting and reporting some of the data, like crates.io providing a dashboard of MSRVs set or rust-versions inferred from user-agents.
Without that, I felt it not worth getting into other policy discussions like reactive vs proactive updating of MSRV, automated MSRV updates, etc. These can always be added later.
This also helps towards #5656.