{
  "$type": "site.standard.document",
  "bskyPostRef": {
    "cid": "bafyreiap4itocn7oo7dpq66tijv6rp2zw7r4ki2lzuvvt7zdug7bt3yz3u",
    "uri": "at://did:plc:ivbknywyskln22er3nkssdhl/app.bsky.feed.post/3mla26kds7jz2"
  },
  "path": "/t/pre-rfc-dns-domains-as-package-namespaces/24202?page=4#post_69",
  "publishedAt": "2026-05-07T01:14:41.000Z",
  "site": "https://internals.rust-lang.org",
  "textContent": "Use of `lib.name` is avoided by _convention_. There are a lot of confusing things in Rust, but people's goodwill means not every `.rs` file is Rust quiz. The OP is encouraging everyone to use `lib.name`, and that's definitely not already the case.\n\nRight now, people can read just the `.rs` files and can tell with reasonable confidence what crates are being used, though not what version of said crates. With the namespacing scheme proposed, we cannot hope to do that, instead we have to read `Cargo.toml` too.\n\nThis is certainly a disadvantage of this approach, but we _will_ still disagree on how severe it is.\n\nLack of namespaces also has a cost. It ensures that crate names will ever increasingly be ridiculous, so that we cannot tell what a crate does, despite knowing its name.\n\nAnd this:\n\nepage:\n\n> Calling it unreasonable is not accurate and is like saying \"memory safety without garbage collection\" is unreasonable. We shouldn't shy away from solving apparent contradictions.\n\nsounds like we're still in 2014. We've been arguing for over a decade with no new ideas, while the rest of Rust have matured. I think it's time we leave the perfect design for Rust's successor and settle on whatever seems least bad at the moment.",
  "title": "[Pre-RFC] DNS domains as package namespaces"
}