Golang >= 1.12 in Buster?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
10 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Golang >= 1.12 in Buster?

Toni Mueller-5

Hello,

I just figured that Buster is, from the current POV, going to ship with
Golang 1.11. While I am new to Go, I figured that we should probably
have a newer version of Golang in Buster, as they are now doing
versioned dependencies, but only starting with 1.12 or 1.13 (not quite
sure about the difference here). This seems to be rapidly adopted by
projects out there, so having only older versions of Golang is becoming
useless quite soon. One project which I am trying to work on, coredns,
already does not compile with anything older than 1.12.

I know we are in freeze already, but I still need to ask, whether there
might be a freeze exception, or how we are going to remedy this
situation?


Cheers,
Toni

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Golang >= 1.12 in Buster?

Shengjing Zhu-3
On Sat, Apr 13, 2019 at 8:12 PM Toni Mueller <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
>
> Hello,
>
> I just figured that Buster is, from the current POV, going to ship with
> Golang 1.11. While I am new to Go, I figured that we should probably
> have a newer version of Golang in Buster, as they are now doing
> versioned dependencies, but only starting with 1.12 or 1.13 (not quite
> sure about the difference here). This seems to be rapidly adopted by
> projects out there, so having only older versions of Golang is becoming
> useless quite soon. One project which I am trying to work on, coredns,
> already does not compile with anything older than 1.12.
>
> I know we are in freeze already, but I still need to ask, whether there
> might be a freeze exception, or how we are going to remedy this
> situation?
>
>

FWIW, golang-1.12 was removed from buster, because the RT think
there're too many golang for buster[1].
At first we have golang-1.{10,11,12} in testing.

[1] https://tracker.debian.org/news/1024215/golang-112-removed-from-testing/

--
Shengjing Zhu

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Golang >= 1.12 in Buster?

Eric Cooper
On Sat, Apr 13, 2019 at 09:54:18PM +0800, Shengjing Zhu wrote:
> FWIW, golang-1.12 was removed from buster, because the RT think
> there're too many golang for buster[1].
> At first we have golang-1.{10,11,12} in testing.
>
> [1] https://tracker.debian.org/news/1024215/golang-112-removed-from-testing/

Go has a very strong commitment to backward compatibility.
Please remove the older versions, not the new one.

--
Eric Cooper             e c c @ c m u . e d u

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Golang >= 1.12 in Buster?

Toni Mueller-5
In reply to this post by Shengjing Zhu-3

Hi,

On Sat, Apr 13, 2019 at 09:54:18PM +0800, Shengjing Zhu wrote:
> FWIW, golang-1.12 was removed from buster, because the RT think
> there're too many golang for buster[1].

there's no logic in that, and especially with the introduction of this
new feature, which the Go community has awaited for so long, I think
it's a perfect way to blast your legs off. It's a bit like removing
Python 3 because there were so many Python2 versions already. Or how
about removing Python2 altogether, then?

> [1] https://tracker.debian.org/news/1024215/golang-112-removed-from-testing/

Thank you for the pointer!

I strongly think that this decision very wrong and should be reversed.
If the RT absolutely insist on cutting down the number of Go versions, I
am not opposed to see eg. golang-1.11 go, however, as I don't see a
compelling case for having it. But others may disagree. In this way, I
fully agree with Eric on this matter.


Cheers,
Toni

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Golang >= 1.12 in Buster?

Mattia Rizzolo-5
On Sun, Apr 14, 2019 at 12:00:18PM +0100, Toni Mueller wrote:
> I strongly think that this decision very wrong and should be reversed.
> If the RT absolutely insist on cutting down the number of Go versions, I
> am not opposed to see eg. golang-1.11 go, however, as I don't see a
> compelling case for having it. But others may disagree. In this way, I
> fully agree with Eric on this matter.

You shouldn't really complain to the release team, but rather to the
golang maintainers, that couldn't manage to move everything off golang
1.11 in time.
If that really was a issue.

It is not any different from how, e.g. the versions of boost, or llvm
are cut down every so often.

--
regards,
                        Mattia Rizzolo

GPG Key: 66AE 2B4A FCCF 3F52 DA18  4D18 4B04 3FCD B944 4540      .''`.
more about me:  https://mapreri.org                             : :'  :
Launchpad user: https://launchpad.net/~mapreri                  `. `'`
Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=mattia  `-

signature.asc (849 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Golang >= 1.12 in Buster?

Dr. Tobias Quathamer
Am 14.04.19 um 18:15 schrieb Mattia Rizzolo:
> You shouldn't really complain to the release team, but rather to the
> golang maintainers, that couldn't manage to move everything off golang
> 1.11 in time.

Just for the record, upstream has released golang 1.12 on February 25,
so only about two weeks before our full freeze. All previous golang 1.12
versions have been betas and release candidates. So the golang
maintainers shouldn't be blamed, either.

I think it's the right decision of the release team to stick with golang
1.11 for buster. The previous migration from golang 1.10 to 1.11 took us
about four weeks until we had fixed all packages with new FTBFS bugs.

Regards,
Tobias


signature.asc (849 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Golang >= 1.12 in Buster?

Hideki Yamane-2
On Sun, 14 Apr 2019 21:11:09 +0200
"Dr. Tobias Quathamer" <[hidden email]> wrote:
> I think it's the right decision of the release team to stick with golang
> 1.11 for buster. The previous migration from golang 1.10 to 1.11 took us
> about four weeks until we had fixed all packages with new FTBFS bugs.

 Can we migrate that from backports -> proposed-updates -> point release?


--
Hideki Yamane <[hidden email]>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Golang >= 1.12 in Buster?

Thomas Goirand-3
On 4/15/19 9:24 AM, Hideki Yamane wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Apr 2019 21:11:09 +0200
> "Dr. Tobias Quathamer" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> I think it's the right decision of the release team to stick with golang
>> 1.11 for buster. The previous migration from golang 1.10 to 1.11 took us
>> about four weeks until we had fixed all packages with new FTBFS bugs.
>
>  Can we migrate that from backports -> proposed-updates -> point release?

Since when do we use backports as a mean to reach Stable?

Cheers,

Thomas Goirand (zigo)

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Golang >= 1.12 in Buster?

Thomas Goirand-3
In reply to this post by Toni Mueller-5
On 4/14/19 1:00 PM, Toni Mueller wrote:
> Or how about removing Python2 altogether, then?

That's actually not a bad idea, which we considered, and only postponed
until Buster is out. FYI, I already started removing Python 2 support in
many of the packages I maintain (currently only uploaded to Experimental
though...).

Thomas Goirand (zigo)

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Golang >= 1.12 in Buster?

Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
In reply to this post by Thomas Goirand-3
On Mon, 15 Apr 2019, Thomas Goirand wrote:

> On 4/15/19 9:24 AM, Hideki Yamane wrote:
> > On Sun, 14 Apr 2019 21:11:09 +0200
> > "Dr. Tobias Quathamer" <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >> I think it's the right decision of the release team to stick with golang
> >> 1.11 for buster. The previous migration from golang 1.10 to 1.11 took us
> >> about four weeks until we had fixed all packages with new FTBFS bugs.
> >
> >  Can we migrate that from backports -> proposed-updates -> point release?
>
> Since when do we use backports as a mean to reach Stable?

Well, it can certainly be used as a way to get extra exposure before
proposing a stable-update.  But that's it, AFAIK.

--
  Henrique Holschuh