Re: Looking for feedback: Unified Go versioning across all Fedora releases

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, 2025-09-03 at 20:30 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Debarshi Ray via devel:
> 
> > This tendency of Go modules (used as dependencies) to keep updating
> > the required Go version has started to bother me in recent times. 
> > It doesn't look like the Go toolchain strictly enforces the
> > version, because I remember trying to build with an older version
> > and succeeding, or maybe I am misremembering?
> 
> With our without an Internet connection?

I was really hoping that the word "misremembering" will let me shrug my
way out of providing proof.  :)

I believe that on the occasions that I tried, it was on my workstation
and I had an Internet connection.

It was almost always an oversight on my part, and not a deliberate
attempt to colour outside the lines.  So, I usually thanked my lucky
stars, bumped the Go version in my go.mod and elsewhere carried on. 
There was one case where I noticed a mistake in a dependency and
reported it:
https://github.com/NVIDIA/nvidia-container-toolkit/issues/886

On one occasion somebody else was doing some downstream backports for
me, which required updating a bundled dependency that specified a newer
Go version in its go.mod than was available in the build root.  I was
worried that the build would fail, but they reported success.  I
neither looked at the exact changes they did nor confirmed if they
built on Koji or elsewhere, because eventually the backports weren't
needed.

> > For example, when using the go command bundled with Go 1.21.3 in a
> > main module that says go 1.21.9, the go command finds and runs Go
> > 1.21.9 instead. It first looks in the PATH for a program named
> > go1.21.9 and otherwise downloads and caches a copy of the Go 1.21.9
> > toolchain.
> 
> <https://go.dev/doc/toolchain>
> 
> Automatic downloading of newer toolchain can paper over lots of
> compatibility issues.

Yes, that's true.

Wasn't that feature introduced in Go 1.21?  If so, I think I might have
gotten away with a mismatch even before, because 1.21 still feels new
to me, but I don't remember.  I can try if it's important, but I didn't
in the interest of time.

Anyway, I do like the proposal for a unified Go version.
-- 
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux