> I don't think that caused any serious problems. It's certainly a different approach - that's the big problem, people aren't used to this kind of approach. I

> I don't think that caused any serious problems. It's certainly a different approach - that's the big problem, people aren't used to this kind of approach. I just watched a video where someone, in response to the policy of not having 'rust' in a crate name, brought up how npm allows 'node', and golang allows 'go' in their package names. And those were mistakes, way more for npm, which they eventually kind of fixed with namespaces. And cargo is not getting namespaces, in fact the whole package system is pretty but that's a separate thing. My bet is that this whole is going to be a disaster, but maybe this is a baby step for more professionalism for future projects to learn from - even if it's about what not to do.