tokio-service vs. tower?

[flosse]

At the moment I can't see a clear direction of tokio-service and tokio-proto. Some people talk about tower to be the replacement of tokio-service (I'd disagree) and there are statements like these:

Tower is going to be the replacement for tokio-service.

I'm a bit confused now.
I really don't care about naming but if all the crates do the same we should synergize the power into one crate. If they are different we should precisely define the differences.
So would you mind to help out to clear up the situation?

[carllerche]

tokio-service is going to be deprecated once tower is released. Tokio will focus on the async I/O runtime aspects (reactor, executor, timer, etc...) and Tower will focus on the request / response abstraction.

It's mostly about having each project focus on one thing.

[flosse]

tower-service is going to be deprecated once tower is released.

I see, that's good to know :)
So the future of tokio-proto is still unclear but that's not part of this issue ;-)

[flosse]

tower-service is going to be [..]

You're talking about tokio-service, don't you?

[carllerche]

@flosse yes! thanks (i updated the comment).