Shorter is more convenient, so I prefer it. crate::foo looks like a module, not a crate. Of course for things like hashes:: to work the renaming has to be in Cargo.toml, not lib.rs

Non-uniformity has started to kreep in again (my fault) since we created units and primitives. Do we want to re-open this discussion?

This applies to bitcoin but the same argument can be applied to primitives:

Option 1:

use crate::Amount;

vs

Option 2:

use units::Amount;

My justification for starting to favour option 1 is that I started to think that downstream would copy what we do and we are explicitly trying to 'hide' units and primitives by mirroring the API.

Should we update policy to be:

• Import explicitly from defining crate except for units and primitives types which can use re-exports?

Example

use core::fmt;

use hashes::sha256;
use internals::write_err;

use crate::{Amount, FeeRate};

hmm, found an anomaly. We have chosen to claim that bitcoin:foo exists for all units::foo but units::parse is not re-exported. but

use crate::parse::{self, ParseIntError, PrefixedHexError, UnprefixedHexError};

seems worse than

use units::parse::{self, ParseIntError, PrefixedHexError, UnprefixedHexError};