[Pre-RFC] `cargo package` should include fewer files by default

epage: > Referring to Cargo Ah I see I think regarding current behavior, the documentation of these fields is already quite extensive. It's nevertheless worth to compare it with the current code down the road, but I think that is a strong starting point and lots of things that I've seen in the code are covered in the docs. In regard to discussions that have happened already, I guess I can do some research in the forum here to bring up some of these older conversations. epage: > The important part of my example was the idea of having editions control defaults, not where those defaults live. Noted. Again I'm not too familiar with all the possibilities we have here (where those defaults could live, how things are handled when migration from one edition to another), but I'm sure that is something that can be figured out along the way. epage: > I would recommend not being so quick to dismiss when someone from the owning team says "we had a similar conversation and we didn't want to bake this in for that". We have no reason for README globs for includes because we already know the README. We already want similar for LICENSE files. To me, a strong reason would be needed to bypass this and have a glob for LICENSE files. I apologize, I did not intend to come off as dismissive. Maybe the language barrier is getting in the way, but I interpreted "shied away from" differently then your follow-up clarification of "we had a similar conversation and we didn't want to bake this in for that". That led me to believe that a final decision was not made yet and encouraged me to provide information from other package managers to maybe help form such a decision. But thank you for clarifying the current state of things! So just to confirm, what you are saying is that the specified license improvement must come before the possible changes that I have described in this Pre RFC?