Currently, if one leaves the “documentation” field of a crate’s Cargo.toml file empty, the crates.io project page will feature no documentation. Because of this, many crates have either no documentation at all, or self-hosted documentation (which is cumbersome to maintain, and may thus not be up to date).
While investigating a better solution for my project, I have discovered that there is this wonderful docs.rs service which automatically builds and hosts the documentation of every cargo crate. For me, it was a no-brainer: I HAD to use this.
With this in mind, I’m wondering: shouldn’t crates.io point to docs.rs by default if no project-specific documentation link has been sent? The answer is not obvious to me, because it would have broader political and technical implications: the docs.rs servers would be getting a lot more traffic which nobody’s paying for, the crates.io and docs.rs projects would become de facto linked to one another…
So I’m asking for your comments on this idea: what do you think about it? Does it sound right to you? In particular, I would very much like people from crates.io and docs.rs to contribute to the discussion and express the view of each project on this.