Incompatible Template implementation options

[moritztim]

Currently, this repository is set up as both a GitHub template repository and a cargo-generate template. This creates potential confusion and inconsistency in how users might initialize new projects.

There are currently two approaches to using this template and they are incompatible:

• The cargo-generate approach is not documented anywhere in this repository
• Users can create repositories directly through GitHub's template feature
• Cargo-generate doesn't seem to support with an already created repository, instead assuming you'll be creating a repository from scratch

Both have drawbacks:

• The GitHub template approach requires manual configuration changes, making it more error-prone and less approachable
• The cargo-generate approach isn't integrated with GitHub the way GitHub templates are (i.e. you can't see that this is a template and that a repository is based on it)

However, I believe that the drawbacks of the github approach are more significant and the original intended use seems to be through cargo-generate, so I suggest disabling the template setting on this repository and adding instructions to the readme.

This would provide a clearer, more maintainable path for users to create new projects based on this template.

Disclaimer: I used Anthropic's Claude LLM to provide a starting point for the structure for this issue.

[9names]

This is an incorrect read of the history of this template. The original intended method for using this template was cloning the repo or downloading it using the github download as zip button. Later we added the GitHub template option. Later than that we added cargo-generate support (once that tool was stable enough).

The intention is for this to work whichever way the end-user tries, so we don't have to force any specific tooling on them.

[moritztim]

I see. In that case, to minimize confusion, the cargo-generate support needs to be documented somewhere so users know that it's available and know that if they're not using it, they should remove it, as it's not really a part of the template if used in that way.