On Wed, Nov 07, 2018 at 09:09:24PM +0100, Pierre Neidhardt wrote: > Sure, but isn't this too much a hassle (and more pollution added to the > package > namespace) for a temporary workaround?
It's a matter of taste :) > Shouldn't we focus on fixing the cache bug in the build system instead? Yes, we should, but that problem is not related to packages not building with Go 1.11 because they need to be updated upstream, right? Even if our go-build-system was updated, those packages would still need to be built with Go 1.9? Or did I misunderstand?
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
