Hi Simon and Nick, Thank you very much for this catch and also sharing the valuable ideas for the package renaming!
On Fri, Jul 31, 2026 at 3:37 PM Simon Josefsson <[email protected]> wrote: > > IMHO it is nice to preserve git history for a source-package rename like > this, but given reverse dependencies, I don't think you can rename the > package on Salsa -- instead setup a new fork under the Go team umbrella, > and continue packaging of the new renamed variant, which needs its own > ITP bug as it will go through NEW. Then file bugs on all reverse > dependencies (with upstream reports) to migrate to the new package name. This is what we need to documented for the transition as I was mostly out of idea how to make a smooth workflow for package rename to match upstream go import path without breaking reverse dependencies during the transition. This gives us a clear path forward during the module-aware builds transition. For module-aware builds, Maintainer should verify and match package names directly from upstream. We should follow the upstream package name logical from https://pkg.go.dev. (Not sure if dh-make-golang may handle this in the future?) BTW, I noticed we have some packages are using dots for major versions (for example, golang-github-gdamore-tcell.v3-dev). Since dots are valid characters inside Go import paths (like domain name or directory name), converting slashes (/) into hyphens (-) rather than dots seems much safer to avoid path confusion in the future, am I correct? Thanks again for checking through my upload and sharing these valuable ideas! Best regards, -Andrew
