My point is researching all this puts a huge burden on (serious) users that would not be there for a big standard library. Currently the Rust approach seems qui

My point is researching all this puts a huge burden on (serious) users that would not be there for a big standard library. Currently the Rust approach seems quite problematic, but I think this can be solved. For example by an explicit guarantee pledged by the Rust team (or a related umbrella / organization / consortium / ...) for a certain set of libraries (platform / ecosystem / 2nd tier standard library extension / stdx / nursery / ...). I think it would be important to include in this pledge: * Transitive closure rule. (No external dependencies not covered by the pledge. Possibly with certain exceptions e.g. for bindings to big known obvious third party dependencies like SQL databases or Operating Systems.) * Uniform licensing rule. (Everything must use the exact same license, with a single group name as copyright holders and for any purposes of required notices etc.) * Maintenance, backward compatibility and platform compatibility rule. (100% compatibility forever everywhere is not even necessary, but an _explicit_ rule of thumb of what reasonable time frames for deprecation windows and recommended transition plans can be expected would be nice.) Or maybe this already exists and I'm just uninformed?