Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This code is cursed but I think it's the way.
I want Specta v2 to be able to develop an ecosystem.
That means independent crates implementing
specta::Type
instead of it being onspecta
to do it for them.If
specta
maintains the impls for downstream crates if any of the downstream crates have a major version bump specta either has to also do a major release or introduce a new feature Eg.tauri
,tauri2
, etc.Specta doing a major release is not a viable option because every downstream crate that has provided a Specta implementation will also need to be upgraded. Hence downstream maintainers don't wanna take on crates that are gonna commonly have major version bumps. This whole thing is also bad for everyone using the libraries because if the versions mismatch between different libraries your using you are just outta luck.
By introducing a
specta-impls
crate, and some cursed code to avoid the orphan rule we can allowspecta-impls
to do major releases without breakingThis allows me to decouple major versions of the Specta features for other crates from the Specta core traits.