From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 21767138334 for ; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 17:45:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9A651E0B06; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 17:45:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-io1-xd42.google.com (mail-io1-xd42.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d42]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4E86DE0ABD for ; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 17:45:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-io1-xd42.google.com with SMTP id n197so56834875iod.9 for ; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 10:45:31 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gentoo-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=2orcogs5v+gkK5J0V3gdPVPzZS0RdB3sJI9Wq7bNhIk=; b=jwWtrWFrs7zjd/hSiP6uaEnXODBmnabc0/mq6nt/k3s98umYLXezZ4rly+dgwdzHva Ro+loJJww+gfixWkxruqN8rwjvygj+lYMXtuWxN/GN2hkLN0f2VuHsZve0DmCO/a4YId AU7eZFam1yRbXBfxsThesobruhoDXLgTPf/THnEBQBepL6ug+y9G4P7OT2ZKu546/BC8 l7F7kstaHX8Nz2V4nm1e8bV8keUzzRVLiyzcbCEABKzb+3dhcoCFDkBv5+buO1y2ZXYd K0+pPiiwYIPvQ6vgPPbpnKAmg1r3Bvded/EG8OLB03gLeXRFGT9x0sKyeLK2ZEh1Lf2G r3tQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=2orcogs5v+gkK5J0V3gdPVPzZS0RdB3sJI9Wq7bNhIk=; b=Sl9Gwh+mHEl0fRJ+ab04iePCd9jHx9N171V0ys9FymWHAy13aXcVdLFj6GNYyhHVU+ VnXl0p5AuGk8vM2VOpaFSnoEhfm10uulcqOoGkRnmEAFLm4Snyu8GP/pjfdZ1YBW/rE2 W+OIA49bP0K58WS/AQ5LJuz1CQouy7vVhAuTD74s1M8u3Baf8x2yddSnbUBJQqpRLTt7 kkvQ7hUX1yBnPLGjRsY7V0zECWabuB7uIsUW3DtlR7yEquss8uQE0Rqqya03rRv0cs4T 7NGZCHGXDAt205GHZrlYJ0OoKa59I9wdYTe9qG0zSmJVdbx+YApV7xyogRe4mDWBlkYB 3VZQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXdoBw2o2BF+JGbadf6C7ATb95F5kYodP3YJmc08bAjsxvwnJO9 +f4gBNgugWGQmriAuwnxMls6muLc8+leGKDlk7CeVcX2 X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqznsq/WAShlVErkyWVbZK9r/HmMizdiBpF5LzLZlCvV+TXr5xe1oT4Bx0GeHt5H/JHJX81q5xbh+N4Pq0oCg8I= X-Received: by 2002:a5d:9904:: with SMTP id x4mr5823098iol.20.1568310330157; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 10:45:30 -0700 (PDT) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org X-Auto-Response-Suppress: DR, RN, NRN, OOF, AutoReply MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20190911172128.18885-1-williamh@gentoo.org> <20190911172128.18885-4-williamh@gentoo.org> <20190911234815.GA21591@whubbs1.dev.av1.gaikai.org> <20190912154634.GB23846@whubbs1.dev.av1.gaikai.org> <88094567-323c-6f6a-a1d9-0c1b77ef53e3@gentoo.org> <6acd490e-6393-62e4-5d07-71c2a3624417@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <6acd490e-6393-62e4-5d07-71c2a3624417@gentoo.org> From: Alec Warner Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2019 10:45:18 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH 3/3] dev-vcs/hub: migrate to go-module.eclass To: Gentoo Dev Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000002084e005925eb49c" X-Archives-Salt: 0dde22a0-bd46-49e2-922d-dbb354eaff28 X-Archives-Hash: e82be9c3e76e1f44461df374fba56d22 --0000000000002084e005925eb49c Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 9:52 AM Michael Orlitzky wrote: > On 9/12/19 12:42 PM, Alec Warner wrote: > > > > In general I don't see bundling as a major problem. In the land of > > dynamic binaries, it's a big advantage because you can upgrade libfoo > > and all consumers of libfoo get the upgrade upon process restart. This > > isn't true for most go programs which are statically linked; so you end > > up asking yourself "why should I make a package for every go module?" > > One obvious answer is that portage then tracks what packages are > > consuming a given module and you can plausibly write a tool that does > > things like "moduleX has a security update, please recompile all > > packages that DEPEND on moduleX" which seems like a tool people would > want. > > > > Subslots do this already. Portage does this already. We have this "tool > that people would want," but only if developers can be bothered to > package things. > Sure; and I listed this as an option. It's certainly not the only option. > > > > [0] I feel like this is a common idea in Gentoo throughout. Anything new > > is bad. Anything that violates norms is bad. Anything that violates the > > model we have been using for 20 years is bad. I wish people were more > > open to have a discussion without crapping on new ideas quite so > thoroughly. > > This is computer *science*. Some ideas are just wrong, and nothing of > value is gained by trying not to hurt the feelings of the flat-earthers. > Er, I'm fairly sure computer *science* has not conclusively proven that dynamic binaries are somehow superior to static binaries. -A --0000000000002084e005925eb49c Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


=
On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 9:52 AM Micha= el Orlitzky <mjo@gentoo.org> wr= ote:
On 9/12/19 = 12:42 PM, Alec Warner wrote:
>
> In general I don't see bundling as a major problem. In the land of=
> dynamic binaries, it's a big advantage because you can upgrade lib= foo
> and all consumers of libfoo get the upgrade upon process restart. This=
> isn't true for most go programs which are statically linked; so yo= u end
> up asking yourself "why should I make a package for every go modu= le?"
> One obvious answer is that portage then tracks what packages are
> consuming a given module and you can plausibly write a tool that does<= br> > things like "moduleX has a security update, please recompile all<= br> > packages that DEPEND on moduleX" which seems like a tool people w= ould want.
>

Subslots do this already. Portage does this already. We have this "too= l
that people would want," but only if developers can be bothered to
package things.

Sure; and I listed this= as an option. It's certainly not the only option.
=C2=A0


> [0] I feel like this is a common idea in Gentoo throughout. Anything n= ew
> is bad. Anything that violates=C2=A0norms is bad. Anything that violat= es the
> model we have been using for 20 years is bad. I wish people were more<= br> > open to have a discussion without crapping on new ideas quite so thoro= ughly.

This is computer *science*. Some ideas are just wrong, and nothing of
value is gained by trying not to hurt the feelings of the flat-earthers.

Er, I'm fairly sure computer *science= * has not conclusively proven that dynamic binaries are somehow superior to= static binaries.

-A=C2=A0
--0000000000002084e005925eb49c--