Re: About how Go is updated in Fedora

V Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 10:39:11AM -0500, Stephen John Smoogen napsal(a): > You can configure koji to do a slightly different depsolving using dnf > versus the koji algorithms, which fix things in that only default > modules may get enabled in mock. [However may is a strong word.. it > sometimes

Re: About how Go is updated in Fedora

On Mon, 20 Dec 2021 at 10:16, Colin Walters wrote: > > > > On Sat, Dec 18, 2021, at 5:06 PM, Fabio Valentini wrote: > > > > Sure, I saw that ticket. But I fail to see how this is this a "new problem". > > If you use, for example, some shiny, new features that are only going > > to be in GCC 12 or

Re: About how Go is updated in Fedora

On Sat, Dec 18, 2021, at 5:06 PM, Fabio Valentini wrote: > > Sure, I saw that ticket. But I fail to see how this is this a "new problem". > If you use, for example, some shiny, new features that are only going > to be in GCC 12 or LLVM 14, There's a *big* difference between Go and C/C++/Rust

Re: About how Go is updated in Fedora

On Sat, Dec 18, 2021 at 11:06:45PM +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote: > > Basically, it seems like we're moving too slowly to keep up with changes in > > Kubernetes, with trickle-down consequences. > > Sure, I saw that ticket. But I fail to see how this is this a "new problem". > If you use, for

Re: About how Go is updated in Fedora

On Sat, Dec 18, 2021 at 3:35 AM Alejandro Saez Morollon wrote: > > > > On Tue, Dec 14, 2021 at 5:01 AM Matthew Miller > wrote: >> >> On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 02:22:24PM +0100, Alejandro Saez Morollon wrote: >> > A hypothetical new release cycle would look like this: >> > >> >- Fedora N

Re: About how Go is updated in Fedora

On Sat, Dec 18, 2021 at 11:01 PM Matthew Miller wrote: > > On Sat, Dec 18, 2021 at 10:34:34PM +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote: > > Honestly, I do not see the problem with how things currently work. > > Isn't it normal that "the new hotness" is first baked to perfection in > > rawhide, until it is

Re: About how Go is updated in Fedora

On Sat, Dec 18, 2021 at 10:34:34PM +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote: > Honestly, I do not see the problem with how things currently work. > Isn't it normal that "the new hotness" is first baked to perfection in > rawhide, until it is then released with the next stable Fedora > release? Well, going

Re: About how Go is updated in Fedora

On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 2:25 PM Alejandro Saez Morollon wrote: > > I've been thinking a little about how Go is updated in Fedora. I would like > to hear other opinions about the current state of the releases and improve it. (snip) Sorry for not seeing this email earlier. I have bee

Re: About how Go is updated in Fedora

On Sat, Dec 18, 2021 at 07:50:34PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote: > Just a note here: Even with default modular streams, non-modular > packages would still only be able to be built with one modular > stream -- the default one. So this isn't a consequence (not even > partly) of us deciding not to have

Re: About how Go is updated in Fedora

On 18. 12. 21 19:04, Matthew Miller wrote: On Sat, Dec 18, 2021 at 09:11:08AM +0100, Alejandro Saez Morollon wrote: But AFAIK, only users can select a module stream, right? I mean, packages can't be build on top of a module stream so new needs of package maintainers cannot be satisfy with

Re: About how Go is updated in Fedora

On 18. 12. 21 9:11, Alejandro Saez Morollon wrote: On Tue, Dec 14, 2021 at 5:01 AM Matthew Miller > wrote: On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 02:22:24PM +0100, Alejandro Saez Morollon wrote: > A hypothetical new release cycle would look like this: > > 

Re: About how Go is updated in Fedora

On Sat, Dec 18, 2021 at 09:11:08AM +0100, Alejandro Saez Morollon wrote: > But AFAIK, only users can select a module stream, right? I mean, packages > can't be build on top of a module stream > so new needs of package maintainers cannot be satisfy with modules. Packages _can_ build on top of a

Re: About how Go is updated in Fedora

On Tue, Dec 14, 2021 at 5:01 AM Matthew Miller wrote: > On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 02:22:24PM +0100, Alejandro Saez Morollon wrote: > > A hypothetical new release cycle would look like this: > > > >- Fedora N release follows Go upstream as close as we can. > >- Fedora N-1 sticks with the

Re: About how Go is updated in Fedora

On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 02:22:24PM +0100, Alejandro Saez Morollon wrote: > A hypothetical new release cycle would look like this: > >- Fedora N release follows Go upstream as close as we can. >- Fedora N-1 sticks with the latest major version of Go that was >available on it until the

About how Go is updated in Fedora

I've been thinking a little about how Go is updated in Fedora. I would like to hear other opinions about the current state of the releases and improve it. This is not related to the Fedora proposal that I'm planning to submit today regarding the update of Go. I do not pretend to change anything