Avoid suggesting star dependencies. #294
Conversation
|
Thanks for the pull request, and welcome! The clap team is excited to review your changes, and you should hear from @kbknapp (or someone else) soon. If any changes to this PR are deemed necessary, please add them as extra commits. This ensures that the reviewer can see what has changed since they last reviewed the code. Due to the way GitHub handles out-of-date commits, this should also make it reasonably obvious what issues have or haven't been addressed. Large or tricky changes may require several passes of review and changes. Please see the contribution instructions for more information. |
A `*` version constraint makes it hard/impossible to release a breaking change (e.g. clap 2.0) without causing people's code to break. `cargo update` with a `*` dependency will happily move from (say) 1.4 to 2.0, even though semver says these may be a breaking change. Using a more precise dependency constraint gives the crate author more flexibility in making breaking changes, and makes users of the crate happier if/when they do happen. rust-lang/rfcs#1241 contains a bit more discussion about this.
|
Indeed, it should be done, thank you! |
|
Done! |
|
Thank you! |
|
📌 Commit 45b101b has been approved by |
Avoid suggesting star dependencies. A `*` version constraint makes it hard/impossible to release a breaking change (e.g. clap 2.0) without causing people's code to break. `cargo update` with a `*` dependency will happily move from (say) 1.4 to 2.0, even though semver says these may be a breaking change. Using a more precise dependency constraint gives the crate author more flexibility in making breaking changes, and makes users of the crate happier if/when they do happen. rust-lang/rfcs#1241 contains a bit more discussion about this.
|
☀️ Test successful - status |
A
*version constraint makes it hard/impossible to release a breakingchange (e.g. clap 2.0) without causing people's code to break.
cargo updatewith a*dependency will happily move from (say) 1.4 to 2.0,even though semver says these may be a breaking change. Using a more
precise dependency constraint gives the crate author more flexibility in
making breaking changes, and makes users of the crate happier if/when
they do happen.
rust-lang/rfcs#1241 contains a bit more
discussion about this.