Post cover image

November 28, 2025

Why Most Rust Codebases Will Collapse in 5 Years: A Dependency Apocalypse Is Coming

By the time you finish reading this, another Rust crate will have gone unmaintained — and someone, somewhere, is about to learn that their…

By Dax

4 min read

By the time you finish reading this, another Rust crate will have gone unmaintained — and someone, somewhere, is about to learn that their "bullet-proof" Rust project is one cargo update away from implosion.

Rust was supposed to save us.

Memory safety. Fearless concurrency. Compile-time guarantees that feel like a warm blanket and a very stern schoolteacher at the same time. For a while, it felt like Rust was the chosen one — the language that would fix everything C and C++ screwed up.

But here's the quiet truth nobody wants to say out loud:

Rust's biggest strength — its ecosystem — is also the ticking bomb that will take down most Rust codebases in the next five years.

And no, the culprit isn't the borrow checker.

It's dependencies. Too many of them. Maintained by too few people. Supporting too many production workloads. For too little payoff.

We are walking into a dependency apocalypse, and Rust is uniquely vulnerable in ways almost no one is willing to admit.

None

1. Rust's Success Created a Dependency Explosion

Rust encourages small, modular crates. Beautiful in theory. Disastrous in practice.

A typical modern Rust microservice looks like this:

[dependencies]
tokio = { version = "1", features = ["full"] }
serde = { version = "1", features = ["derive"] }
serde_json = "1"
reqwest = "0.12"
tracing = "0.1"
thiserror = "1"
anyhow = "1"
axum = "0.7"
hyper = "1"

That's before you even write hello world.

Each of these crates pulls in other crates. And those crates pull in their crates.

Your "simple" project now depends on 140+ transitive crates — most maintained by one exhausted person who is doing it after work, for free, and hoping their employer never finds out they're basically holding up half the industry.

Meanwhile, your CTO believes Rust "solves the stability problem."

Cute.

2. The People Problem: Open Source Burnout at Scale

Many of Rust's foundational crates are maintained by individuals who:

  • Are not paid
  • Have limited time
  • Are burned out
  • Are maintaining mission-critical infrastructure alone

Let me show you something real from a popular Rust crate maintainer:

[2024-10-18] Issue #492
"Sorry for the delay, I changed jobs and haven't had time.
If anyone wants to help maintain this crate, please reach out."

This crate is downloaded millions of times a month. It sits under banking systems, blockchain nodes, distributed backends, startup infrastructure, and production systems that assume everything is fine because Rust "doesn't break."

But it does break. It will break.

All it takes is one person burning out. (Spoiler: they already are.)

3. The Supply Chain Nightmare Nobody Wants to Discuss

Other languages have dependency explosions too — but Rust's ecosystem has a uniquely dangerous trait:

Rust crates often go extremely deep in the dependency graph.

Examples:

  • tokio → dozens of crates
  • hyper → dozens of crates
  • reqwest → depends on both tokio and hyper
  • axum → depends on everything above
  • Add tracing + serde + macros → another 20–30 crates

Rust's power comes from this modularity. Rust's doom also comes from this modularity.

If 1 crate in the 150-crate chain goes unmaintained:

  • security patches halt
  • compiler version bumps fail
  • MSRV guarantees break
  • downstream crates freeze
  • your codebase becomes fossilized

Rust's "guarantees" don't protect you against ecosystem rot.

Memory safety won't save you from maintainers quitting.

4. "Just Fork It" Is a Lie

People say:

"If a Rust crate goes unmaintained, we can just fork it."

Sure. Let's try that.

You fork a crate. It depends on 12 other crates. Those depend on 40 other crates. Those depend on 100+ other crates.

Congratulations — you didn't fork a crate. You forked a small country.

And you now maintain it.

Rust's complexity — especially around lifetimes, unsafe blocks, and async — makes many crates maintainable by a very small number of people on Earth.

Forking isn't a strategy. It's a coping mechanism.

5. The Coming Death Spiral: MSRV Hell

Rust moves fast. Too fast.

Every new compiler release improves codegen, borrow checking, async behavior, and safety guarantees.

But here's the unintended side effect:

Keeping a crate updated to modern Rust is a full-time job.

If a crate stops updating:

  • newer crates stop depending on it
  • older crates fall behind MSRV
  • downstream users switch away
  • the ecosystem "quarantines" it
  • the crate effectively dies

Multiply that by 200,000+ crates and you get an extinction event.

The Rust ecosystem works only if everyone keeps up. Spoiler: they won't.

6. Corporate Rust Is Not the Savior People Expect

Big companies love Rust. But big companies also love this sentence:

"We will not maintain forks of upstream open-source dependencies."

They use. They don't maintain.

So the largest Rust deployments — AWS, Cloudflare, Meta, Discord, Mozilla, Fly.io, Dropbox — are powered by crates that hinge on the wellbeing of random individuals.

These companies benefit tremendously.

But they don't own the risk. You do.

7. The Moment Everything Breaks

Let me show you a realistic future scenario, from a log file you will absolutely see at 3:27 AM on a Tuesday:

error[E0432]: unresolved import `hyper::client::HttpConnector`
  --> src/network/mod.rs:7:5
   |
7  |     HttpConnector
   |     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ no `HttpConnector` in `client`

You scroll. You search GitHub issues. You find this:

"hyper v2 removed HttpConnector. Please migrate to h2_client.
Documentation is pending.”

But the crate you depend on — which depends on hyper — hasn't updated in 2 years.

And the maintainer? Their last commit message was:

"Taking a break. Not sure when I'll return."

Your entire codebase is now pinned to hyper v1 forever.

This is how Rust projects die. Quietly. Slowly. Then all at once.

8. So What Can Be Saved?

Here's the hard truth:

Most Rust projects will either be rewritten or abandoned within 5 years.

But some will survive. They'll be the ones that do the following:

1. Minimize dependencies ruthlessly

If you can write it yourself in 50 lines, do it.

2. Stick to the "boring" crates

The Tokio + Serde + Hyper + Axum stack is actually safer than the niche crates with 400 weekly downloads.

3. Track MSRV aggressively

Don't let Rust version drift build up.

4. Contribute upstream early, not late

Help maintainers before you rely on them.

5. Avoid deep macro magic

When a macro-heavy crate dies, it becomes unrevivable cryptography.

6. Build internal expertise

Your team must understand your dependencies deeply — not just import them.

7. Treat Rust projects like living organisms

Rust code has a lifecycle. If you don't feed it, it starves.

9. The Hopeful Twist Nobody Expects

Here's the strange part:

The dependency apocalypse won't kill Rust. It will mature Rust.

Developers will:

  • write fewer dependencies
  • maintain more in-house code
  • prioritize stability > cleverness
  • support maintainers financially
  • build tools for supply-chain reliability
  • treat Rust not like magic, but like engineering

Rust will survive its adolescence. But many Rust projects won't.

And maybe that's okay. Maybe ecosystems need a purge to grow up.

10. The Loop Back: Why This Matters

I spent a decade watching codebases rot — Java, Go, Node, Python, C++. Each ecosystem had its breaking point.

Rust's breaking point is dependencies.

The irony? Rust did save us from memory bugs.

But it couldn't save us from ourselves.

We built an ecosystem too big, too fast, on the backs of too few people — and we pretended the compiler could fix human nature.

It can't.

But we can.

If we start now.