On Friday, 23 October 2020 4:20:37 AM AEDT Shengjing Zhu wrote:
> However kubernetes is also a library, and the maintainer doesn't provide
> it. It becomes headache for other maintainers.
Yes we have to vendor "k8s.io/" all the time in multiple packages but I doubt
it would be of help if
On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 12:16:03PM -0700, Sean Whitton wrote:
>
> - are people trying to do cross-archive work going to find the packaging
> of kubernetes getting in their way? (e.g. other Go team members
> trying to update things, improve our binNMU techniques and machinery,
> etc.)
>
On Thursday, 22 October 2020 2:16:16 AM AEDT Sean Whitton wrote:
> I think that we can all agree with everything you've written about the
> reasons why packaging components separately is better.
Thank you.
> The problem is
> that in this case the choice seems to be between not having recent
>
On Wednesday, 21 October 2020 8:56:53 PM AEDT Felix Lechner wrote:
> How is the second one inferior, please? I think it includes a crucial
> missing feature (co-installable versions).
To reduce maintainers burden, you want maintainers to look after not one but
multiple versions of libraries.
Hello Dmitry,
On Wed 21 Oct 2020 at 11:21am +11, Dmitry Smirnov wrote:
> On Wednesday, 21 October 2020 6:16:03 AM AEDT Sean Whitton wrote:
>> I think that my message [1] is what makes you think that the package
>> would not have got through NEW?
>
> It was not your message but my own experience
Hello,
On Tue 20 Oct 2020 at 06:52pm -07, Felix Lechner wrote:
> I think our response to the vendoring explosion is at odds with the
> trends in many languages.
>
> It's time to retool. At the two ends of the solution spectrum, I see
>
> 1. Fully vendored source packages; or
> 2. A
Hi Dmitry,
On Wed, Oct 21, 2020 at 12:50 AM Dmitry Smirnov wrote:
>
> Yes, at first there will
> be a significant effort but then it will become easier.
I know you put a lot of effort in (as did Michael Stapelberg, with
whom I spent some time before he left), but I don't think our current
Hi Felix,
On Wednesday, 21 October 2020 12:52:40 PM AEDT Felix Lechner wrote:
> > We favour technical elegance often in expense of maintainers' comfort.
>
> Is our approach really either one of those? I think our response to
> the vendoring explosion is at odds with the trends in many languages.
Hi Dmitry,
On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 5:24 PM Dmitry Smirnov wrote:
>
> Let's not attempt to fabricate perception of consensus please.
Consensus is a worthy goal and perhaps even possible, per below.
> We favour technical elegance
> often in expense of maintainers' comfort.
Is our approach
On Wednesday, 21 October 2020 6:16:03 AM AEDT Sean Whitton wrote:
> I think that my message [1] is what makes you think that the package
> would not have got through NEW?
It was not your message but my own experience with introducing of 100+
packages through NEW, especially those ones with large
Hello Dmitry, others,
On Thu 01 Oct 2020 at 11:15am +10, Dmitry Smirnov wrote:
> I seek your judgement regarding excessive, unnecessary and unjustifiable
> vendoring of private libraries in Kubernetes package:
>
> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=970717
>
> Some relevant
Package: tech-ctte
Severity: normal
X-Debbugs-CC: o...@debian.org
Control: block 970717 by -1
Dear Technical Committee,
Apologies that we were not able to resolve the problem without your help.
I seek your judgement regarding excessive, unnecessary and unjustifiable
vendoring of private
12 matches
Mail list logo
