To me, the two major problems are:
- no namespaces
Someone uploads “serde2”? that’s blocked forever. Someone uploads a typo version of a popular package? Too bad for you, learn how to type.
- the github connection
If you want to contribute to crates.io you’re bound to github. No gitlab, codeberg, gitee, sourcehut, etc.
Not sure if there are any other problems, but those two seem like the biggest things and #1 is AFAIK not something they ever want to change + it would be difficult to as one would need a migration strategy.
Isn’t github used only as the auth provider? It is not using any git features, just leaning on the security guarantees of github. I don’t find this too alarming.
If you want, you can use git links when declaring dependencies in Cargo.toml. So alternative to crates.io is basically any git host already!
Semver checks don’t work with straight git urls, since you can only link to an explicit branch or commit, not a version.
version
can be passed withgit
actually. And it will need to match with the version set inCargo.toml
from the git source.I wouldn’t call that an alternative to crate registries though (of which,
crates.io
is only one impl).Also tangentially related,
cargo-vendor
is a thing.Semver strings allows stuff like “version 2.5.x, but below 2.5.6”. Then cargo calculates the best solution for satisfying all dependency specifications from all packages using a single version (if possible).
Specifying a version in addition to the git branch doesn’t help there at all, because you still have to do it manually then.
Still makes you bound to github. Can’t publish to crates.io without github.
What security guarantee does github have? I can create a new account right now with a random email, sign up for crates.io and type-squat a package.
Sure, but how do you discover the package? That’s the other function of a registry. Also, I could easily just add another package as a submodule, but that’s not the point.