https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2271204
--- Comment #10 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek zbyszek@in.waw.pl --- I read that part of the guidelines when I was figuring out what the name of the package should be. The guideline text is:
Rust crates that are published on crates.io MUST be packaged with rust-$crate as the name of the source package (where $crate is the name of the project on crates.io). [...] On the other hand, projects from other sources MUST NOT use the rust- prefix for source package names
So this *is* a project from crates.io. The name is registered on crates.io and you can download a version of this project from there, even if it not exactly the version which is present in the package. In fact, I pushed version 0.1.0 to crates.io specifically to satisfy the guidelines and make rust2rpm generate the binary package as expected.
There is a certain ambiguity here. You said that "sources MUST be from crates.io", but this is NOT in the the text of the guidelines.
I always understood the PG rule for naming with rust-* as intended to prevent confusion and or/conflict if a different package with a given name was later uploaded to crates.io.
Once the code stabilizes, I expect normal releases to be made and uploaded to crates.io. I didn't do this here, because it seemed silly to tag new versions when the package is under development and I'll want to build a new version in rawhide possibly every few days and there are no other uses of the crate.
That said, I would be fine with renaming the package to 'add-determinism' if there's a strong reason to do that.