Closed vados-cosmonic closed 3 months ago
@alexcrichton / @lukewagner / @yoshuawuyts would anyone mind taking a look at this?
I just realized that one other change we discussed in #382 that maybe we want to make in this PR (if we want it to fully resolve #382) is the validation requirements (attached to the various gates) of: @since
xor @unstable
and gates-imply-top-level-package
(just as an extra sentence or two in the section that introduces the gates).
@lukewagner thanks that's a great catch -- that little requirement was definitely an eye opener on the code side -- will add!
Kept this particular change separate so it might be easy to review (I added some headings):
Would appreciate just a bit more feedback!
Awesome, lgtm, thanks again! Once things are implemented enough to feel good about this PR, lmk and I'll merge this.
Yup! I'll squash here and see what I can do about updating implementation in other spots!
Hey @lukewagner so at this point the optional feature is removed (in a semi-breaking manner, those changes should percolate through but have rarely few people affected), anything else I'm missing? We don't have a new version of wit-parser
and/or wit-component
out yet of course, but it should be relatively real now going forward.
Great, thanks again for all the work!
This commit addds some explanation of the intended usage pattern of feature gates in order to make the transition points and functionality easier to identify/reason about.
Resolves #382