Manish Goregaokar

I consider removing the root crate name to also be a transformation that can potentially be confusing. A thing that I might not have mentioned in the RFC (but I'll...

@yigal100 I've added a section. I do somewhat like the leaf approach and it was closer to my original idea but I found in feedback that people who wanted to...

Would folks proposing `::` be willing to come up with a proposal for `::` that includes all the different aspects that need to be addressed? I'd also love to handle...

If separators are going to be a major discussion I'm also happy to direct people to https://github.com/Manishearth/namespacing-rfc/issues/1 and/or https://github.com/Manishearth/namespacing-rfc/issues/2 and request in-depth discussion occur there.

Yeah, let's consolidate discussion on separator choice there. I've updated the RFC with links to the issue, further comments about separator choice may be hidden and redirected there instead (until...

@epage i'd quite like this; but I think the design space for that is pretty large (in particular, there's a difference between "renaming a crate" and "moving development effort into...

@mitsuhiko As mentioned in the RFC and earlier in this thread, broadly speaking, there are two use cases for this. There is the "organization" use case where an "organization" wishes...

@jhpratt I don't think it does, your proposal there seems to be more for internal crates; this is not about internal crates; this is about multiple crates in a single...

@kornelski let's hold off on discussing the exact representation in the registry trie until https://github.com/Manishearth/namespacing-rfc/issues/1 is resolved. The direction that discussion is going might very well render this moot.

@epage I've added a clearer motivation