On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 6:23 AM, Martín Ferrari wrote:
> On 27/07/17 14:05, Michael Stapelberg wrote:
> > It does break the API, as evinced by one build failure.
> >
> > I’m not aware of situations in the past where we created a new binary.
> > How would we name them? Is it worth the trouble?
>
>
On 27/07/17 14:05, Michael Stapelberg wrote:
> It does break the API, as evinced by one build failure.
>
> I’m not aware of situations in the past where we created a new binary.
> How would we name them? Is it worth the trouble?
We had to do it once, for golang-github-dgrijalva-jwt-go-v3-dev
Wor
It does break the API, as evinced by one build failure.
I’m not aware of situations in the past where we created a new binary. How
would we name them? Is it worth the trouble?
Personally, I would just update the new version + the fixed affected
packages in one go, to reduce the breakage to a mini
