Decide on a better strategy for release notes/changelogs about rustup

[djc]

Adding rustup to thanks seems nice, but I worry that it might be quite a bit of work, since from the description it looks like it might currently be tied into rust-lang/rust stuff.

I prefer boring/familiar stuff because it will be easier to maintain so I'd prefer to avoid cargo script until it actually lands in the stable toolchain.

[rami3l]

I don't think we should necessarily make the blog posts on the Rust blog actually like they have been before. In particular, IMO listing all contributors in the blog post is overkill (the Rust blog doesn't do that for Rust releases) and could be deferred to the changelog here.

Yeah, it's kinda tedious really. I wish I wouldn't have to spend like an hour (maybe two or more for the 0.1s?) per release night just to figure this out. Maybe the release blog posts are written in this way because... people tend to do what the Romans do to be safe, but things don't have to be this way.

#3773 (comment)

@djc I have an idea! What about making rust-lang/thanks recognize us as well? The fact that we're currently not recognized on https://thanks.rust-lang.org is something I been always wanting to point out since a while ago. This way, we can just use a link towards that page to replace the whole section, just like Rustc does right now; also, all the Rustup contributors can then get the credit they deserve!

[rami3l]

On the other hand, rust-lang/rfcs#3503 has been merged and it seems that the cargo feature is already partially implemented. I think we can adopt cargo-script early with either this script or gen-workflows.sh.