Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.bugs.dist > #1275506 > unrolled thread

Bug#1116589: New upstream of golang

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.bugs.dist

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Bug#1116589: New upstream of golang "Dr. Tobias Quathamer" <toddy@debian.org> - 2025-12-22 14:30 +0100
    Bug#1116589: New upstream of golang Tianon Gravi <tianon@debian.org> - 2025-12-23 06:20 +0100
      Bug#1116589: New upstream of golang "Dr. Tobias Quathamer" <toddy@debian.org> - 2026-01-30 13:50 +0100
        Bug#1116589: New upstream of golang Tianon Gravi <tianon@debian.org> - 2026-01-31 10:50 +0100
          Bug#1116589: New upstream of golang "Dr. Tobias Quathamer" <toddy@debian.org> - 2026-01-31 22:50 +0100

#1275506 — Bug#1116589: New upstream of golang

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Hi Tianon,

I just wanted to ask if you know of anyone currently doing test rebuilds 
with golang-1.25. Unfortunately, I'm not in a position to do this myself.

If noone is planning to do this, I'm wondering if we should just upload 
1.25 as default package. In my experience, the backward compatibility by 
golang upstream is rather good.

Also, I don't remember that we've done test rebuilds in the past before 
setting the golang-defaults version to the new upstream. At least I 
didn't do that before uploading a new golang-defaults package -- but 
maybe those were different times. :-)

Best regards,
Tobias

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1275558

On Mon, 22 Dec 2025 at 05:21, Dr. Tobias Quathamer <toddy@debian.org> wrote:
> I just wanted to ask if you know of anyone currently doing test rebuilds
> with golang-1.25. Unfortunately, I'm not in a position to do this myself.
>
> If noone is planning to do this, I'm wondering if we should just upload
> 1.25 as default package. In my experience, the backward compatibility by
> golang upstream is rather good.
>
> Also, I don't remember that we've done test rebuilds in the past before
> setting the golang-defaults version to the new upstream. At least I
> didn't do that before uploading a new golang-defaults package -- but
> maybe those were different times. :-)

Whether we do test rebuilds or not, we definitely need to coordinate a
transition with the release team - in fact, we probably *should* coordinate
a transition for every upload of src:golang-X.Y also, but I'm not sure and
it's probably worth double checking that we haven't been causing unnecessary
excess labor for them.

Quoting from https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/ReleaseTeam/Transitions, which
contains the relevant text:

> The Release Team considers everything a transition where the upload of a
> package requires changes (rebuilds or actual patches) to reverse
> dependencies.

♥,
- Tianon

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1280229

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Am 23.12.25 um 05:31 schrieb Tianon Gravi:
> Whether we do test rebuilds or not, we definitely need to coordinate a
> transition with the release team - in fact, we probably *should* coordinate
> a transition for every upload of src:golang-X.Y also, but I'm not sure and
> it's probably worth double checking that we haven't been causing unnecessary
> excess labor for them.
> 
> Quoting from https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/ReleaseTeam/Transitions, which
> contains the relevant text:
> 
>> The Release Team considers everything a transition where the upload of a
>> package requires changes (rebuilds or actual patches) to reverse
>> dependencies.

Hi Tianon,

sorry for my late reply. I'd like to get this going again, as you've 
already prepared golang 1.26 (thanks for that, by the way!).

I think by now it might make more sense to skip 1.25 entirely and bump 
the -defaults package to 1.26 directly, because the stable release of 
1.26 is probably not far away.

If we need to do a test rebuild, I think it's better to wait a little 
longer for 1.26 and start the rebuilds with the new version, instead of 
rebuilding now with 1.25 and doing the same for 1.26 in two or three weeks.

Anyway, about the rebuilding and transition: Have you had the chance to 
reach out to the release team, to ask them about their view on this 
matter? Do they think that a transition is necessary?

If not, I'd be happy to write them a mail, but I thought I'd ask you 
first, because it seems that you've been doing most (if not all) of the 
new golang compiler uploads.

Regards,
Tobias

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1280296

On Fri, 30 Jan 2026 at 04:40, Dr. Tobias Quathamer <toddy@debian.org> wrote:
> Am 23.12.25 um 05:31 schrieb Tianon Gravi:
> > Whether we do test rebuilds or not, we definitely need to coordinate a
> > transition with the release team - in fact, we probably *should* coordinate
> > a transition for every upload of src:golang-X.Y also, but I'm not sure and
> > it's probably worth double checking that we haven't been causing unnecessary
> > excess labor for them.
> >
> > Quoting from https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/ReleaseTeam/Transitions, which
> > contains the relevant text:
> >
> >> The Release Team considers everything a transition where the upload of a
> >> package requires changes (rebuilds or actual patches) to reverse
> >> dependencies.
>
> Hi Tianon,
>
> sorry for my late reply. I'd like to get this going again, as you've
> already prepared golang 1.26 (thanks for that, by the way!).
>
> I think by now it might make more sense to skip 1.25 entirely and bump
> the -defaults package to 1.26 directly, because the stable release of
> 1.26 is probably not far away.
>
> If we need to do a test rebuild, I think it's better to wait a little
> longer for 1.26 and start the rebuilds with the new version, instead of
> rebuilding now with 1.25 and doing the same for 1.26 in two or three weeks.
>
> Anyway, about the rebuilding and transition: Have you had the chance to
> reach out to the release team, to ask them about their view on this
> matter? Do they think that a transition is necessary?
>
> If not, I'd be happy to write them a mail, but I thought I'd ask you
> first, because it seems that you've been doing most (if not all) of the
> new golang compiler uploads.

Unfortunately, I haven't gotten to writing such a mail -- I did the
recent uploads because they were security-related. 😬

If you'd like to do so, please do!  That would be very helpful. 😄

♥,
- Tianon

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1280348

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Am 31.01.26 um 10:44 schrieb Tianon Gravi:
> Unfortunately, I haven't gotten to writing such a mail -- I did the
> recent uploads because they were security-related. 😬
> 
> If you'd like to do so, please do!  That would be very helpful. 😄

Hi Tianon,

I've just created a bug asking about a transition for golang.
See https://bugs.debian.org/1126733.

Regards,
Tobias

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.bugs.dist

csiph-web