❦ 25 mai 2016 16:32 -0400, Peter Colberg <pe...@colberg.org> : >> > I need this package for use in gobgp which >> > uses it through github.com/eapache/channels. >> > >> > Should I package golang-github-eapache-channels-dev or >> > golang-gopkg-eapache-channels.v1-dev? >> > >> > In the first case, should I provide a symbolic link for >> > gopkg.in/eapache/channels.v1 or wait for anything else needing this >> > symbolic link? >> >> I would go with first option because if package ever moves to .v2 you'll >> only >> need to update "Provides" field (and symlink). Providing compatibility >> symlink may be useful even if nobody uses it yet. > > On the other hand, having golang-gopkg-….vN as separate source and > binary packages allows having multiple major versions in Debian when > applications depend on different major versions of a package.
Since this was not consensual, I did go with gopkg.in + a symlink. The
main reasons is that packages from the same upstream also are in this
namespace.
I already did the upload, but should I had added "Provides:
golang-github-eapache-channels-dev"?
--
Test programs at their boundary values.
- The Elements of Programming Style (Kernighan & Plauger)
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list Pkg-go-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers
