Re: <DKIM> Re: Proposed Fedora packaging guideline: More Go packaging
by nicolas.mailhot＠laposte.net
De: "Owen Taylor"
> I'm embarrassed to admit that before I sent my mail I carefully read over
> ... the old PackageDrafts/Go :-( My only excuse is that it was in my
> browser history.
NP, that gave you some context on where Fedora is today.
> Having actually read the relevant parts of "More Go Packaging", the
> explanation of compat packages and notification procedures does make the
> intended operation clearer,
Thank you. Do not hesitate to improve the wording in the wiki, or post suggestions here, if you have ideas on how to make it clearer, simpler or more efficient
> though the social and technical barrier to a
> packager new to Fedora will still be high if packaging their target package
> requires creating a compat package and fixing multiple other packages.
Unfortunately, packaging something in Go is still going to be harder than packaging software in another language in the near term :( I'd love to find more magic bullets.
> I still worry that Fedora is not big enough to move the status-quo in the
> Go world - to get the point where Go programs require github.com/foo/bar >=
> .2.3 and actually have been tested with a multiple versions in that range,
> not exactly the one vendored version shipped with the program.
That's a legitimate worry, yes. However given container and cloud people are massively adopting Go, that critical cloud software is now mostly written in Go, I don't think Fedora can afford to pass on Go and still stay relevant server-side. That's even more true for Fedora downstreams and Fedora's main sponsor.
So I guess it all boils down to strategic choices for Fedora and Red Hat: invest in Go packaging, even if it *is* painful, or pass, and lose relevance server-side in the near future. Red Hat certainly has the assets, with Openshift and Coreos, to influence the Go world in a Fedora-positive way. I don't know if it will choose, or manage, to leverage them. It can not fail to notice the many Go projects that propose their software as Ubuntu Docker images today. It can not fail to notice that Jakub and Jan, with all their qualities, are a tad overworked and not really sufficient to pull Fedora Go forward the required amount. The Go ecosystem has just grown too big. Lastly, I understand the temptation to let Fedora and RHEL slip in favor of product lines more profitable in the near term.
On my employer's side we *do* wish to stay relevant in a Cloud world. My Go contributions are an attempt to partner with the Fedora Centos and RHEL communities on that. If the partnership does not bear fruits, and Fedora/Centos/RHEL do not move in a direction we can use, we'll have to invest elsewhere. I'd regret it but this proposal and the spec dump that will follow are just too much work to do on one's free time. And employer time requires results.
> I haven't had time to read through the entire proposal, but it certainly
> looks like a major step forward!
Please finish reading it and propose all the fixes and comments and improvements you want! Your experience is appreciated.
Regards,
--
Nicolas Mailhot
