Tracking issue for RFC 2141: Add support to Cargo for alternative registries

[aturon]

This is a tracking issue for the RFC "Add support to Cargo for alternative registries" (rust-lang/rfcs#2141).

Steps:

• Implement the registries key in .cargo/config and Cargo.toml - Alternative registries cargo#4506
• Support login tokens for multiple registries - Support login tokens for multiple registries cargo#4680
• Add a command to generate registry index data
• Allow renaming crates in the dependencies section - Allow renaming crates in the dependencies section cargo#1311 (also necessary for RFC 2126: Clarify and streamline paths and visibility)
• path and registry shouldn't be mutually exclusive in dependency configurations - Allow path + registry dependencies cargo#4844
• Track which commands a registry supports in its config.json - Track which commands a registry supports in its config.json cargo#4747
• Make .cargo/credentials a subset of .cargo/config - Make .cargo/credentials a subset of .cargo/config cargo#4839
• What is the significance of "specification" of index format/API?
• Areas requiring agreement for stabilization of alternative registries
• Adjust documentation (see instructions on forge)
• Stabilization PR (see instructions on forge)

Unresolved questions:

• Are the names of everything what we want?

  • cargo generate-index-metadata?
  • registry = my-registry?
  • publish-registries = []?

• What kinds of authentication parameters do we need to support in .cargo/credentials?

[matklad]

I think PR is already in flight: rust-lang/cargo#4506

[cswindle]

I have PR for adding the parts in the RFC about changes to publish: rust-lang/cargo#4568

[est31]

I've encountered some issues with the official crates.io index. It appears to be non-conformant to the spec: rust-lang/crates.io#1168

[ninrod]

Hi, this issue seems to target enterprise usage. This means artifactory support, which is really the standard in enterprise, right? Right now I want to use rust in my company and cannot because of that.

Would it be useful to add a bullet like: "works in artifactory"?

[wycats]

@ninrod I think we'd want to get some eyeballs and feedback from Artifactory, but I don't necessarily think we need to wait to stabilize until they actually implement.

[wycats]

@est31 I commented on rust-lang/crates.io#1168

[stuhood]

@ninrod : Bumps on https://www.jfrog.com/jira/browse/RTFACT-13469 would be appreciated.