I'm fine having our split out packages depend on each other where it is actually useful (errors clearly depends on errgo), but it does sound like loggo isn't a very strong dependency and can just be removed.
John =:-> On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 3:27 PM, Nate Finch <[email protected]>wrote: > Actually, I just looked at the code again, and the code that uses loggo > will be compiled out unless you modify the code to change a constant. > Let's just remove the code and the package include, and if people want to > modify the code to print out debugging info, they can do that however they > want. > > > On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 7:24 AM, Nate Finch <[email protected]>wrote: > >> I just noticed that errgo uses loggo for one single debug statement. I >> think this is a mistake if we want errgo to be reusable by the community. >> We should strive to make our independent packages actually independent.... >> removing unnecessary dependencies is a big part of that. We shouldn't >> force people to include loggo in their product if all they want is >> errgo.... especially given that we're barely using loggo in the package. >> >> Can we remove the debug code, or use the stdlib's logging or something? >> I don't think we're getting a lot of value out of using loggo in this >> package. >> > > > -- > Juju-dev mailing list > [email protected] > Modify settings or unsubscribe at: > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev > >
-- Juju-dev mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev
