Change:
} </style> <del> This is an index of the documentation included with the Rust compiler. For more comprehensive documentation see [the website](https://www.rust-lang.org). </del> <ins> This page is an overview of the documentation included with your Rust install. Other unofficial documentation may exist elsewhere; for example, the [Rust Learning] project collects documentation from the community, and [Docs.rs] builds documentation for individual Rust packages. </ins> <del> [**The Rust Programming Language**][book]. Also known as "The Book", The Rust Programming Language is the most comprehensive resource for all topics related to Rust, and is the primary official document of the language. </del> <ins> ## API Documentation </ins> <del> [**The Rust Reference**][ref]. While Rust does not have a specification, the reference tries to describe its working in detail. It is accurate, but not necessarily complete. </del> <ins> Rust provides a standard library with a number of features; [we host its documentation here][api]. </ins> <del> [**Standard Library API Reference**][api]. Documentation for the standard library. </del> <ins> ## Reference Documentation </ins> <del> [**The Rustonomicon**][nomicon]. An entire book dedicated to explaining how to write unsafe Rust code. It is for advanced Rust programmers. </del> <ins> Rust does not yet have a formal specification, but we have [a reference document ][ref]. It is guaranteed to be accurate, but not complete. We now have a policy that all new features must be included in the reference before stabilization; however, we are still back-filling things that landed before then. That work is being tracked [here][38643]. </ins> <del> [**Compiler Error Index**][err]. Extended explanations of the errors produced by the Rust compiler. </del> <ins> ## Extended Error Documentation </ins> <del> [book]: book/index.html [ref]: reference.html </del> <ins> Many of Rust's errors come with error codes, and you can request extended diagnostics from the compiler on those errors. We also [have the text of those extended errors on the web][err], if you prefer to read them that way. ## The Rust Bookshelf Rust provides a number of book-length sets of documentation, collectively nicknamed 'The Rust Bookshelf.' * [The Rust Programming Language][book] teaches you how to program in Rust. * [The Rustonomicon][nomicon] is your guidebook to the dark arts of unsafe Rust. [Rust Learning]: https://github.com/ctjhoa/rust-learning [Docs.rs]: https://docs.rs/ </ins> [api]: std/index.html <del> [nomicon]: nomicon/index.html </del> <ins> [ref]: reference.html [38643]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/38643 </ins> [err]: error-index.html <ins> [book]: book/index.html [nomicon]: nomicon/index.html </ins>

Discussion:
RFC PR: Checklist: [x] Create a landing page for the bookshelf. [x] Pull mdbook into tree and port the nomicon and book to it [x] enable linkchecker for the books (prereq: ) [x] Port the reference to mdbook [x] Create a new "Nightly Book" in-tree. I think this all looks similar to [x] Pull the book out of tree into rust-lang/book [x] Pull the nomicon out of tree [x] Pull the reference out of tree [x] Pull the cargo docs out of tree and convert them to mdBook. [ ] Publish cargo book as part of Rust.
can we coordinate soon on getting this implemented? We had talked very broadly about it before, now it's time to get concrete Some of this is blocked by , I believe, which is the blocker for using mdbook to build. The rest of it is blocked on being able to integrate the out-of-tree stuff into the builds.
Will 2nd edition be moved elsewhere when 1st edition moves to rust-lang/book?
the idea is that they will both be in the same repository. The exact strategy isn't totally clear; we'll see as we dig into packaging implementation details. I am imagining sub-folders.
I made some comments on regarding the old and new book. I have tried to familiarize myself with this issue since if has a little different focus but is the successor of that issue. In doing so I have two comments unrelated to old vs new books discussion: For the 3rd party documentation resources that you want to display on the bookshelf but are not core/official, there are still advantages to getting them transfered under a common GitHub organization where possible. I am not saying that should be done in any way to minimize the control or credit of the original author and hope it would never be utilized in that way. However, being under a common organization makes for a less disruptive process if something unfortunate and unforeseen happens (health, accident, etc.) because new maintainers would not need to fork the project to a new URL to continue work. Please be mindful when presenting the "Nightly Book" on the documentation page and/or make it clear on the landing page of the Nightly Book what the book is.

As I read this documentation, the "Nightly Book" will only contain information on new features/changes; however, my first thought on seeing the name is that it would be the latest documentation built from nightly. Not a huge deal, but a potential issue that is easily mitigated by context. This may have happened automatically without me mentioning it.
The latest definitive comment on what is to happen with the old book and the new book appears to be by The main question I have regarding that approach is, "How are the two books differentiated from each other?" Case-in-point, there is already inconsistency in how they are referenced, old/new and first/second edition. Perhaps another way to make the distinction is, "If you could not use "Edition" or any variant of versioning, how would you title the "old" and "new" book?" If there is some clear grounds that differentiate them (different learning approaches, style, brevity, etc.), they might both be have sustained usefulness. If, however, the distinction is between old and new version of essentially the same thing, then there would seem to be little to be gained in maintenance or continuance of the older version.
Officially, it's a second edition of the book. Even though it's a substantial re-write, conceptually, it's the same work. However, given that it's a re-write, and with help, it is very different. The biggest thing is that it's still not done yet, so the current plan is to have show "Hey here's the two editions," explain the difference, and link to a and (or some similar URL structure.)
thanks for the reply! Are do you envision that situation changing at all once the second edition is complete?
Table of content granularity regression:
Regression in playground "Run" buttons:
Playground run buttons are actually
Docs team triage: p-medium. and cargo work outstanding.
A kind of unrelated question here: is there a way to see the for and channel? Maybe on a different domain? I'm asking to understand how I can actually see the changes when working on migrating Cargo docs to the Bookshelf. ()
All the releases and release channels have subfolders on So nightly is on and beta is on Whenever you link the cargo docs in with the rest of the rust docs, the full doc bundle is made when you run an on the rust repo, and placed in .

Thanks, for the info. So now I know how to test the full docs build locally.
We are done with preparing the Cargo docs in book format, which was have filed the next steps. We can add this to the list in the description here.