On Sat, Mar 3, 2018 at 2:45 PM, Otavio Salvador <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sat, Mar 3, 2018 at 4:59 PM, Khem Raj <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Sat, Mar 3, 2018 at 9:44 AM, Matt Madison <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Since it looks like I'll have to do a v5 on my series anyway, I can >>> pull in that backport for the aarch64 issue. >> >> sure, I would suggest we keep 1.9 around as well. > > I am against. Go is good to provide backward compatibility and keeping > both just causes people to delay the update. We have some time to > April release and thus any regression will be ironed out. Possibly > wait until 1.10.1 is out but keeping two releases I am unsure it is > needed.
Your disagreement is acknowledged. There are larger systems written in go which haven't moved to go 1.10 and I know for sure influxdb and grafana are not working with 1.10 and there might be many more real world programs which will be in same boat. This is no different then what we do with gcc releases where we overlap them for couple of releases to smooth out transition. -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
