FAQ
I have plenty of bugs related to the Go installation filled against my
personal projects due to the broken Go distributions from various package
managers (aptitude, brew, etc). It seems like these packages are hardly
ever maintained and providing very old versions of Go. Surprisingly, the
Wiki also suggests installation via apt-get for Ubuntu at
https://github.com/golang/go/wiki/Ubuntu.

I am suggesting to take over the ownerships of the packages or, at least,
have a consistent message across the board that the downloads page is the
official source for the binaries.

Any thoughts?

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Search Discussions

  • Andrew Gerrand at Jan 25, 2016 at 9:37 pm

    On 26 January 2016 at 06:21, Burcu Dogan wrote:

    I have plenty of bugs related to the Go installation filled against my
    personal projects due to the broken Go distributions from various package
    managers (aptitude, brew, etc). It seems like these packages are hardly
    ever maintained and providing very old versions of Go. Surprisingly, the
    Wiki also suggests installation via apt-get for Ubuntu at
    https://github.com/golang/go/wiki/Ubuntu.
    That wiki page should probably edited to recommend installation from a
    binary download.

    I am suggesting to take over the ownerships of the packages
    >

    Can you enumerate the packages you're referring to?

    The version in homebrew
    <https://github.com/Homebrew/homebrew/blob/master/Library/Formula/go.rb>
    was updated to 1.5.3 minutes after the official release, so we don't need
    to worry about them.

    The Debian and Ubuntu packages, IIUC, are updated as frequently as the
    distro release schedules permit. A better solution for those distros would
    be for us to provide an apt repository from which people can install a
    current "golang" package. There's an open issue
    <https://github.com/golang/go/issues/10965> about this, and you're welcome
    to tackle it. Also, since you're a Google employee, I can also pass on some
    Google-internal information about signing deb packages with Google's keys
    that has been sitting in my inbox for months.

    have a consistent message across the board that the downloads page is the
    official source for the binaries.
    This should already be the case. It's certainly the line I've been pushing
    for years. But people want to get their software from the place they get
    all their other software, which does seem reasonable.

    Andrew

    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-dev" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
  • Burcu Dogan at Jan 26, 2016 at 1:04 am
    On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 1:37 PM, Andrew Gerrand wrote:
    On 26 January 2016 at 06:21, Burcu Dogan wrote:

    I have plenty of bugs related to the Go installation filled against my
    personal projects due to the broken Go distributions from various package
    managers (aptitude, brew, etc). It seems like these packages are hardly
    ever maintained and providing very old versions of Go. Surprisingly, the
    Wiki also suggests installation via apt-get for Ubuntu at
    https://github.com/golang/go/wiki/Ubuntu.
    That wiki page should probably edited to recommend installation from a
    binary download.

    I am suggesting to take over the ownerships of the packages
    Can you enumerate the packages you're referring to?
    I am particularly unhappy about the apt packages though it could be our
    responsibility to coordinate or doublecheck if homebrew is distributing the
    right version.

    The version in homebrew
    <https://github.com/Homebrew/homebrew/blob/master/Library/Formula/go.rb>
    was updated to 1.5.3 minutes after the official release, so we don't need
    to worry about them.

    The Debian and Ubuntu packages, IIUC, are updated as frequently as the
    distro release schedules permit. A better solution for those distros would
    be for us to provide an apt repository from which people can install a
    current "golang" package. There's an open issue
    <https://github.com/golang/go/issues/10965> about this, and you're
    welcome to tackle it. Also, since you're a Google employee, I can also pass
    on some Google-internal information about signing deb packages with
    Google's keys that has been sitting in my inbox for months.
    Publishing an apt repository or maintaining the existing golang package
    (which has already been documented everywhere, including
    https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Go) would both work even though we will suffer from
    the freeze policies. IMHO, whoever wants to tackle this issue needs to be
    the one who are issuing the official binary distributions. I don't see a
    point why we should include a third person and add more communication
    overhead.

    have a consistent message across the board that the downloads page is the
    official source for the binaries.
    This should already be the case. It's certainly the line I've been pushing
    for years. But people want to get their software from the place they get
    all their other software, which does seem reasonable.

    Andrew
    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-dev" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
  • Andrew Gerrand at Jan 26, 2016 at 8:55 pm
    On 26 January 2016 at 12:04, Burcu Dogan wrote:
    On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 1:37 PM, Andrew Gerrand wrote:


    On 26 January 2016 at 06:21, Burcu Dogan wrote:

    I have plenty of bugs related to the Go installation filled against my
    personal projects due to the broken Go distributions from various package
    managers (aptitude, brew, etc). It seems like these packages are hardly
    ever maintained and providing very old versions of Go. Surprisingly, the
    Wiki also suggests installation via apt-get for Ubuntu at
    https://github.com/golang/go/wiki/Ubuntu.
    That wiki page should probably edited to recommend installation from a
    binary download.

    I am suggesting to take over the ownerships of the packages
    Can you enumerate the packages you're referring to?
    I am particularly unhappy about the apt packages though it could be our
    responsibility to coordinate or doublecheck if homebrew is distributing the
    right version.
    Sure, I welcome more oversight across all the ways Go is packaged. I
    suspect homebrew is taking care of itself, though (IIRC whenever there's a
    new Go release a few different people race to submit the PR updating
    homebrew).

    The Debian and Ubuntu packages, IIUC, are updated as frequently as the
    distro release schedules permit. A better solution for those distros would
    be for us to provide an apt repository from which people can install a
    current "golang" package. There's an open issue
    <https://github.com/golang/go/issues/10965> about this, and you're
    welcome to tackle it. Also, since you're a Google employee, I can also pass
    on some Google-internal information about signing deb packages with
    Google's keys that has been sitting in my inbox for months.
    Publishing an apt repository or maintaining the existing golang package
    (which has already been documented everywhere, including
    https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Go) would both work even though we will suffer
    from the freeze policies.
    IIUC the packages in Debian and Ubuntu are already maintained. The way to
    make this better is with a new apt repository.

    IMHO, whoever wants to tackle this issue needs to be the one who are
    issuing the official binary distributions. I don't see a point why we
    should include a third person and add more communication overhead.
    I don't think this is true. There's a bunch of work that needs to happen
    for us to provide an apt repository that is independent to the release
    process:
    - add support to x/build/cmd/release for building deb files,
    - set up an official apt repository,
    - figure out how to sign deb files with Google's key and add that to the
    internal release process docs.

    If you, or anyone, wants to do that work (fixing issue 10965
    <https://github.com/golang/go/issues/10965>) then that would be a big help.
    A step after that would be to look at yum packages for CentOS and the like.

    Andrew

    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-dev" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
  • Henrik Johansson at Jan 26, 2016 at 10:00 pm
    This would be awesome! Having an official yum repo with Google signatures
    would make life so much easier when dealing with fairly paranoid ops
    people.
    On Tue, Jan 26, 2016, 21:55 Andrew Gerrand wrote:
    On 26 January 2016 at 12:04, Burcu Dogan wrote:


    On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 1:37 PM, Andrew Gerrand wrote:


    On 26 January 2016 at 06:21, Burcu Dogan wrote:

    I have plenty of bugs related to the Go installation filled against my
    personal projects due to the broken Go distributions from various package
    managers (aptitude, brew, etc). It seems like these packages are hardly
    ever maintained and providing very old versions of Go. Surprisingly, the
    Wiki also suggests installation via apt-get for Ubuntu at
    https://github.com/golang/go/wiki/Ubuntu.
    That wiki page should probably edited to recommend installation from a
    binary download.

    I am suggesting to take over the ownerships of the packages
    Can you enumerate the packages you're referring to?
    I am particularly unhappy about the apt packages though it could be our
    responsibility to coordinate or doublecheck if homebrew is distributing the
    right version.
    Sure, I welcome more oversight across all the ways Go is packaged. I
    suspect homebrew is taking care of itself, though (IIRC whenever there's a
    new Go release a few different people race to submit the PR updating
    homebrew).

    The Debian and Ubuntu packages, IIUC, are updated as frequently as the
    distro release schedules permit. A better solution for those distros would
    be for us to provide an apt repository from which people can install a
    current "golang" package. There's an open issue
    <https://github.com/golang/go/issues/10965> about this, and you're
    welcome to tackle it. Also, since you're a Google employee, I can also pass
    on some Google-internal information about signing deb packages with
    Google's keys that has been sitting in my inbox for months.
    Publishing an apt repository or maintaining the existing golang package
    (which has already been documented everywhere, including
    https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Go) would both work even though we will suffer
    from the freeze policies.
    IIUC the packages in Debian and Ubuntu are already maintained. The way to
    make this better is with a new apt repository.

    IMHO, whoever wants to tackle this issue needs to be the one who are
    issuing the official binary distributions. I don't see a point why we
    should include a third person and add more communication overhead.
    I don't think this is true. There's a bunch of work that needs to happen
    for us to provide an apt repository that is independent to the release
    process:
    - add support to x/build/cmd/release for building deb files,
    - set up an official apt repository,
    - figure out how to sign deb files with Google's key and add that to the
    internal release process docs.

    If you, or anyone, wants to do that work (fixing issue 10965
    <https://github.com/golang/go/issues/10965>) then that would be a big
    help. A step after that would be to look at yum packages for CentOS and the
    like.

    Andrew


    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
    "golang-dev" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
    email to golang-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-dev" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
  • Burcu Dogan at Jan 27, 2016 at 5:03 am
    On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 12:54 PM, Andrew Gerrand wrote:
    On 26 January 2016 at 12:04, Burcu Dogan wrote:


    On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 1:37 PM, Andrew Gerrand wrote:


    On 26 January 2016 at 06:21, Burcu Dogan wrote:

    I have plenty of bugs related to the Go installation filled against my
    personal projects due to the broken Go distributions from various package
    managers (aptitude, brew, etc). It seems like these packages are hardly
    ever maintained and providing very old versions of Go. Surprisingly, the
    Wiki also suggests installation via apt-get for Ubuntu at
    https://github.com/golang/go/wiki/Ubuntu.
    That wiki page should probably edited to recommend installation from a
    binary download.

    I am suggesting to take over the ownerships of the packages
    Can you enumerate the packages you're referring to?
    I am particularly unhappy about the apt packages though it could be our
    responsibility to coordinate or doublecheck if homebrew is distributing the
    right version.
    Sure, I welcome more oversight across all the ways Go is packaged. I
    suspect homebrew is taking care of itself, though (IIRC whenever there's a
    new Go release a few different people race to submit the PR updating
    homebrew).

    The Debian and Ubuntu packages, IIUC, are updated as frequently as the
    distro release schedules permit. A better solution for those distros would
    be for us to provide an apt repository from which people can install a
    current "golang" package. There's an open issue
    <https://github.com/golang/go/issues/10965> about this, and you're
    welcome to tackle it. Also, since you're a Google employee, I can also pass
    on some Google-internal information about signing deb packages with
    Google's keys that has been sitting in my inbox for months.
    Publishing an apt repository or maintaining the existing golang package
    (which has already been documented everywhere, including
    https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Go) would both work even though we will suffer
    from the freeze policies.
    IIUC the packages in Debian and Ubuntu are already maintained. The way to
    make this better is with a new apt repository.

    IMHO, whoever wants to tackle this issue needs to be the one who are
    issuing the official binary distributions. I don't see a point why we
    should include a third person and add more communication overhead.
    I don't think this is true. There's a bunch of work that needs to happen
    for us to provide an apt repository that is independent to the release
    process:
    - add support to x/build/cmd/release for building deb files,
    - set up an official apt repository,
    - figure out how to sign deb files with Google's key and add that to the
    internal release process docs.
    Sorry, I had little context about the x/build and infra side of the TODOs.
    Given the tools, it could be coordinated by the person who is issuing the
    release.

    If you, or anyone, wants to do that work (fixing issue 10965
    <https://github.com/golang/go/issues/10965>) then that would be a big
    help. A step after that would be to look at yum packages for CentOS and the
    like.
    I am pretty packed for another 6 months for non-Go projects and therefore
    will have no time to contribute.

    Andrew

    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-dev" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
  • Andrew Gerrand at Jan 27, 2016 at 5:12 am

    On 27 January 2016 at 16:03, Burcu Dogan wrote:
    If you, or anyone, wants to do that work (fixing issue 10965
    <https://github.com/golang/go/issues/10965>) then that would be a big
    help. A step after that would be to look at yum packages for CentOS and the
    like.
    I am pretty packed for another 6 months for non-Go projects and therefore
    will have no time to contribute.
    Ah, I see. I thought from your initial post that you were proposing to work
    on this. I see now that you were suggesting it as something we should work
    on. I agree.

    I'll leave the issue <https://github.com/golang/go/issues/10965> assigned
    to me, but if someone else wants to tackle it (better if they work at
    Google, but workable if not), please chime in.

    Andrew

    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-dev" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
  • Michael Hudson-Doyle at Jan 26, 2016 at 10:03 pm

    On 26 January 2016 at 08:21, Burcu Dogan wrote:
    I have plenty of bugs related to the Go installation filled against my
    personal projects due to the broken Go distributions from various package
    managers (aptitude, brew, etc).
    Do you mean broken, or just old?
    It seems like these packages are hardly ever
    maintained and providing very old versions of Go. Surprisingly, the Wiki
    also suggests installation via apt-get for Ubuntu at
    https://github.com/golang/go/wiki/Ubuntu.

    I am suggesting to take over the ownerships of the packages
    For Ubuntu and Debian specifically, I'm not sure what you mean by
    taking ownership. Are you going to apply to become a DD?

    I've been the de facto maintainer of Go in Ubuntu for the last six
    months or so, and I've managed to keep the latest releases up to date:
    Wily/15.10 has Go 1.5 and Xenial (the current development version, to
    become 16.04) has 1.6 beta 2 and will get rcs and 1.6 final before
    release. If you have problems with the packages or the schedule,
    please file bugs!

    I think it's pretty likely that what you're really complaining about
    is that when someone using the current Ubuntu LTS installs the golang
    package, they get Go 1.2, which is hilariously ancient by now. This is
    a trickier problem to fix: we can't simply update the golang package
    to 1.5 because that will break compilation of other packages. I've
    recently started the process of getting a separate go 1.5 package into
    trusty (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/golang/+bug/1536882)
    but that's not something that we really want to do for every version
    of Go.
    or, at least,
    have a consistent message across the board that the downloads page is the
    official source for the binaries.

    Any thoughts?
    Having an official apt archive that is kept up to date with the latest
    release would make sense to me, whether it's a PPA on Launchpad or
    something Google maintains (actually, probably two or three archives:
    one for releases, one for beta/rcs and maybe a daily one). I've been
    meaning to propose something like this but I've just not got around to
    it. I'm certainly happy to help.

    Cheers,
    mwh

    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-dev" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
  • Burcu Dogan at Jan 27, 2016 at 5:03 am

    On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 2:03 PM, Michael Hudson-Doyle wrote:
    On 26 January 2016 at 08:21, Burcu Dogan wrote:
    I have plenty of bugs related to the Go installation filled against my
    personal projects due to the broken Go distributions from various package
    managers (aptitude, brew, etc).
    Do you mean broken, or just old?
    Old.

    It seems like these packages are hardly ever
    maintained and providing very old versions of Go. Surprisingly, the Wiki
    also suggests installation via apt-get for Ubuntu at
    https://github.com/golang/go/wiki/Ubuntu.

    I am suggesting to take over the ownerships of the packages
    For Ubuntu and Debian specifically, I'm not sure what you mean by
    taking ownership. Are you going to apply to become a DD?

    I've been the de facto maintainer of Go in Ubuntu for the last six
    months or so, and I've managed to keep the latest releases up to date:
    Wily/15.10 has Go 1.5 and Xenial (the current development version, to
    become 16.04) has 1.6 beta 2 and will get rcs and 1.6 final before
    release. If you have problems with the packages or the schedule,
    please file bugs!

    I think it's pretty likely that what you're really complaining about
    is that when someone using the current Ubuntu LTS installs the golang
    package, they get Go 1.2, which is hilariously ancient by now. This is
    a trickier problem to fix: we can't simply update the golang package
    to 1.5 because that will break compilation of other packages.

      Do we break them due to the changes in the tooling?

    I've
    recently started the process of getting a separate go 1.5 package into
    trusty (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/golang/+bug/1536882)
    but that's not something that we really want to do for every version
    of Go.
    How do we avoid dependencies on the new package not to repeat what happened
    to the golang package in the first place? Will the new package come to a
    point that
    updating it may break the other packages?

    or, at least,
    have a consistent message across the board that the downloads page is the
    official source for the binaries.

    Any thoughts?
    Having an official apt archive that is kept up to date with the latest
    release would make sense to me, whether it's a PPA on Launchpad or
    something Google maintains (actually, probably two or three archives:
    one for releases, one for beta/rcs and maybe a daily one). I've been
    meaning to propose something like this but I've just not got around to
    it. I'm certainly happy to help.

    Cheers,
    mwh
    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-dev" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
  • Michael Hudson-Doyle at Jan 27, 2016 at 8:49 am

    On 27 January 2016 at 18:03, Burcu Dogan wrote:

    On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 2:03 PM, Michael Hudson-Doyle
    wrote:
    On 26 January 2016 at 08:21, Burcu Dogan wrote:
    I have plenty of bugs related to the Go installation filled against my
    personal projects due to the broken Go distributions from various
    package
    managers (aptitude, brew, etc).
    Do you mean broken, or just old?

    Old.
    OK.
    It seems like these packages are hardly ever
    maintained and providing very old versions of Go. Surprisingly, the Wiki
    also suggests installation via apt-get for Ubuntu at
    https://github.com/golang/go/wiki/Ubuntu.

    I am suggesting to take over the ownerships of the packages
    For Ubuntu and Debian specifically, I'm not sure what you mean by
    taking ownership. Are you going to apply to become a DD?

    I've been the de facto maintainer of Go in Ubuntu for the last six
    months or so, and I've managed to keep the latest releases up to date:
    Wily/15.10 has Go 1.5 and Xenial (the current development version, to
    become 16.04) has 1.6 beta 2 and will get rcs and 1.6 final before
    release. If you have problems with the packages or the schedule,
    please file bugs!

    I think it's pretty likely that what you're really complaining about
    is that when someone using the current Ubuntu LTS installs the golang
    package, they get Go 1.2, which is hilariously ancient by now. This is
    a trickier problem to fix: we can't simply update the golang package
    to 1.5 because that will break compilation of other packages.

    Do we break them due to the changes in the tooling?
    Yeah, it's a few different things. I've only been paying attention for
    the 1.4 -> 1.5 and 1.5 -> 1.6 transitions but a few things that I've
    seen cause breakage:

      * cgo rule changes
      * go tool changes causing arguably broken build scripts to break
    (e.g. having an empty segment on GOPATH used to be ignored)
      * import path changes (code.google.com -> golang.org/x)
      * test suites making assumptions about the exact textual layout of tracebacks
      * scheduling changes breaking buggy programs that happened to work by accident
      * testing/quick producing nil pointers broke at least one test suite

    It's no one thing and lots of them are things that were "broken"
    anyway, but still...
    I've
    recently started the process of getting a separate go 1.5 package into
    trusty (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/golang/+bug/1536882)
    but that's not something that we really want to do for every version
    of Go.

    How do we avoid dependencies on the new package not to repeat what happened
    to the golang package in the first place? Will the new package come to a
    point that
    updating it may break the other packages?
    It's a good question. The aim is to only allow things that are
    actively maintained to depend on it. (and the set of packages that are
    "actively maintained" in a LTS is not all that large).
    or, at least,
    have a consistent message across the board that the downloads page is
    the
    official source for the binaries.

    Any thoughts?
    Having an official apt archive that is kept up to date with the latest
    release would make sense to me, whether it's a PPA on Launchpad or
    something Google maintains (actually, probably two or three archives:
    one for releases, one for beta/rcs and maybe a daily one). I've been
    meaning to propose something like this but I've just not got around to
    it. I'm certainly happy to help.

    Cheers,
    mwh
    Cheers,
    mwh

    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-dev" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
Discussion Overview
groupgolang-dev @
categoriesgo
postedJan 25, '16 at 7:51p
activeJan 27, '16 at 8:49a
posts10
users4
websitegolang.org

People

Translate

site design / logo © 2021 Grokbase