The lack of namespaces on crates.io is a feature
samsieber.tech
The lack of namespaces on crates.io is a feature
1–10 of 198 posts
Re: The lack of namespaces on crates.io is a feature
#2true. like in php.
Re: The lack of namespaces on crates.io is a feature
#3For those not familiar with Rust or the debate around this subject, "namespace" here is not like a C++ namespace (Rust's modules are analogous to C++'s namespaces). "namespace" here is about the crates.io package registry, not the Rust language.
Let's say you have a crate (Rust's terminology for a package) named "foo". Inside "foo" you have a few subcrates (named "foo_bar", "foo_baz", "foo_qux"). There are a number of situations where a crate will have subcrates. Sometimes these subcrates are intended to be used publicly (e.g., you want people to be able to use just the "foo_bar" subcrate if they don't need the whole "foo" crate) Sometimes these subcrates aren't intended to be used publicly (e.g., Cargo forces you to put your proc macro in a separate crate, but that's an implementation detail of "foo" and isn't something other people should use directly).
So now you have "foo" on crates.io, as well as a bunch of "foo_*" subcrates on crates.io. Currently there is nothing stopping some random developer from publishing their own "foo_haha" crate. This new crate isn't related to your "foo" crates and might even be squatting on a name you would have liked to use for a subcrate.
Or multiple people might want to create different crates for similar things. e.g., there are multiple regular expression crates. But only one of these crates got the "regex" name. Everyone else has to use a different name, and sometimes people use creative (unintuitive) crate names.
So for various reasons, some people want namespacing on crates.io that would allow someone to reserve an entire namespace. This would allow you to prevent others from using a name that might be confusingly similar to yours. It also allows you to use conflicting crate names if multiple people want to publish different crates with the same name.
TL;DR some people want something like npm's scopes for crates.io. And other people don't want it. This has led to much debate and arguing and whatnot.
It's funny, though, because the team that owns crates.io almost never weighs in on the discussion, and on the rare occasion that one of the team members does say something they always do it in a personal capacity and not in a way that represents the team. This has created its own set of frustrations.
Re: The lack of namespaces on crates.io is a feature
#4You really should look to other ecosystems and see what lessons they've learned. In java, packages are normally "namespaced" by the author's reverse domain name, like `org.lwjgl/lwjgl`.
Since clojure uses maven as well, the same applies, but clojure tools like leiningen decided to create a shortcut: if the group and artifact name are the same, like `iglu/iglu`, they can be collapsed into one name: `iglu`
Well, that just encouraged everyone to choose collapsible names. In retrospect, this didn't buy us much. Who cares about saving a few characters of typing? Most now seem to agree it wasn't a good idea.
When the "collapsed" name falls out of maintenance, the forks will all seem somehow less "official", even if they are much higher quality. Forks are inevitable; why would you want to discourage them?
I finally decided to start using the reverse of my personal domain for my future libraries. The java folks were right all along.
Re: The lack of namespaces on crates.io is a feature
#5I remember when this came up because of the following user:
Re: The lack of namespaces on crates.io is a feature
#6For those not familiar with Rust or the debate around this subject, "namespace" here is not like a C++ namespace (Rust's modules are analogous to C++'s namespaces). "namespace" here is about the crates.io package registry, not the Rust language. Let's say you have a crate (Rust's terminology for a package) named "foo". Inside "foo" you have a few subcrates (named "foo_bar", "foo_baz", "foo_qux"). There are a number o…
The article's title is poor. "namespaces in [language name]" should be about the traditional computer science notion of namespaces.
A better title may be "No Namespaces in Rust's Package System Is a Feature", although that is long.
Re: The lack of namespaces on crates.io is a feature
#7I remember when this came up because of the following user: https://crates.io/users/swmon
Interestingly, you can't name squat on GitHub. I just asked them for the guy squatting my first name and they gave it to me. Ah, the power of non-community-run product. You can do the right thing without having to worry about the slippery slope.
Re: The lack of namespaces on crates.io is a feature
#8I remember when this came up because of the following user: https://crates.io/users/swmon
Also https://crates.io/users/tony-iqlusion
That person is definitely not helping the perception that a significant fraction of the cryptofinance community is scammers, and that their presence has a negative effect on the community.
Re: The lack of namespaces on crates.io is a feature
#9You really should look to other ecosystems and see what lessons they've learned. In java, packages are normally "namespaced" by the author's reverse domain name, like `org.lwjgl/lwjgl`. Since clojure uses maven as well, the same applies, but clojure tools like leiningen decided to create a shortcut: if the group and artifact name are the same, like `iglu/iglu`, they can be collapsed into one name: `iglu` Well, that j…
> Forks are inevitable; why would you want to discourage them?
The conclusion that we don't want to discourage forks may be valid, but this doesn't seem to be good reasoning. Lots of things are inevitable that we want to discourage or delay.
Re: The lack of namespaces on crates.io is a feature
#10I remember when this came up because of the following user: https://crates.io/users/swmon
This also happens with PyPI. I've been lucky to reclaim a package name I wanted and had been squatted, but I've also seen some squatters observant of requests to reclaim squatted names, and then they start adding some (usually useless) functionality to the package. See [0] for one example.