On 06/30/2015 07:01 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 04:48:29PM -0700, Zac Medico wrote:
>> On 06/30/2015 03:08 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
>>> Thinking about this, there may be a third option. This would take a
>>> slight reworking of the golang-build.eclass, but that is easy to d
On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 04:48:29PM -0700, Zac Medico wrote:
> On 06/30/2015 03:08 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
> > Thinking about this, there may be a third option. This would take a
> > slight reworking of the golang-build.eclass, but that is easy to do,
> > and it would possibly remove the subslot
On 06/30/2015 03:08 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 02:34:52PM -0700, Zac Medico wrote:
>> On 06/30/2015 01:30 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
>>>
>>> I don't really see what the competing concerns are in this case.
>>
>> The competing concern is that un-bundling has some possibly un
On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 02:34:52PM -0700, Zac Medico wrote:
> On 06/30/2015 01:30 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 10:53:58AM -0700, Zac Medico wrote:
> >> On 06/30/2015 08:35 AM, William Hubbs wrote:
> >>> All,
> >>>
> >>> we have digressed a bit, so I want to bring the discuss
On 06/30/2015 01:30 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 10:53:58AM -0700, Zac Medico wrote:
>> On 06/30/2015 08:35 AM, William Hubbs wrote:
>>> All,
>>>
>>> we have digressed a bit, so I want to bring the discussion back to what
>>> my main concerns are about this issue.
>>>
>>> 1. S
Hi Daniel,
On 06/20/2015 05:35 AM, Daniel "zlg" Campbell wrote:
> Sorry for not replying sooner; my client didn't seem to reflect folder
> updates...
>
> Are there any urgent bugs right now? I'm moving tomorrow and won't be
> able to tend to them if so, but I am interested in taking
> maintainers
On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 10:53:58AM -0700, Zac Medico wrote:
> On 06/30/2015 08:35 AM, William Hubbs wrote:
> > All,
> >
> > we have digressed a bit, so I want to bring the discussion back to what
> > my main concerns are about this issue.
> >
> > 1. Should we bundle Go packages with Go software?
On 06/30/2015 11:25 AM, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> On 06/30/2015 02:12 PM, Zac Medico wrote:
>>
>>> Suppose ten years from now everything is written in Go. I have 500
>>> statically linked Go packages on my system, all of whose dependencies
>>> were built and compiled-in at install time. Now someone
On 06/30/2015 02:12 PM, Zac Medico wrote:
>
>> Suppose ten years from now everything is written in Go. I have 500
>> statically linked Go packages on my system, all of whose dependencies
>> were built and compiled-in at install time. Now someone finds a remote
>> root vulnerability in the go-opens
On 06/30/2015 11:12 AM, Zac Medico wrote:
> As I mentioned in my reply to William [1], we might invent a notion of
> having one ebuild execute another ebuild in order to install static
> dependencies into a temporary build directory. That way, static
> libraries would be built on-demand, and disca
On 06/30/2015 08:49 AM, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> On 06/29/2015 11:25 PM, Zac Medico wrote:
>>
>> Considering that Go binaries are statically linked, you'll end up with a
>> bunch of Go libraries installed that you don't need during run-time.
>>
>
> They'll eventually give this up, because everyon
On 06/30/2015 08:35 AM, William Hubbs wrote:
> All,
>
> we have digressed a bit, so I want to bring the discussion back to what
> my main concerns are about this issue.
>
> 1. Should we bundle Go packages with Go software?
>
> If we do, except for the Go standard library which is part of
> dev-l
FWIW, I also bumped into this in my previous job.
I even wrote this (https://github.com/neurogeek/g-npm) which is incomplete
but saved me a bunch of time creating a crazy amount of npm ebuilds.
My experience is, this isn't worth it. npm is a mess, is
maintainer-unfriendly (although it might be ar
On 06/29/2015 11:25 PM, Zac Medico wrote:
>
> Considering that Go binaries are statically linked, you'll end up with a
> bunch of Go libraries installed that you don't need during run-time.
>
They'll eventually give this up, because everyone does when their
language starts seeing serious use. I
All,
we have digressed a bit, so I want to bring the discussion back to what
my main concerns are about this issue.
1. Should we bundle Go packages with Go software?
If we do, except for the Go standard library which is part of
dev-lang/go, do we need to bother with installing Go sources and
pac
On 06/30/2015 03:56 AM, Ian Delaney wrote:
>
> Is this what I prompted about a year or more ago, and drew no interest
> in pursuing the npm path? I cited an eclass called npm.eclass in a
> dev's overlay. The conclusion was that using npm to install anything
> competed with portage at a level that
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 30/06/2015 05:25, Zac Medico wrote:
> On 06/29/2015 07:24 PM, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
>> On 06/29/2015 07:44 PM, Zac Medico wrote:
>>>
Having faced the exact same problem I have to say I agree 100% with
Zac. I'd like to say that Gentoo needs thi
On Sun, 28 Jun 2015 12:30:25 -0400
Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> I recently found a need for the CoffeeScript compiler[0] that runs on
> top of NodeJS. Its test suite requires a bunch of other javascript
> packages, and I wound up packaging enough of them to test
> CoffeeScript.
>
> In the process I
18 matches
Mail list logo
