GNU bug report logs - #55903
[PATCHSET] Adding aerc

Previous Next

Full log

Message #257 received at 55903 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Maxime Devos <maximedevos <at> telenet.be>
To: "(" <paren <at> disroot.org>, 55903 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#55903] [PATCH 25/41] gnu: Add
 go-github-com-protonmail-go-crypto-openpgp.
Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2022 14:53:44 +0200

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

( schreef op zo 12-06-2022 om 11:46 [+0100]:
> On Sat Jun 11, 2022 at 11:27 PM BST, Maxime Devos wrote:
> > If it's backward compatible, maybe packaging the fork isn't necessary.
> 
> The _API_ is backwards compatible, but packaging it is necessary because
> the OpenPGP implementation is different (although you use it the same way).
>
> [...]
> Go packaging is a bit crazy, seems like this kind of fork overuse is
> common. Sadly, it's usually necessary to package the forks. (There'll
> be a reason they're using the forks in the first place...)

It's not necessary to package the forks if the fork is merged back
upstream, and we can refuse to package impacted packages until things
improve.  Or if upstream is unmaintained, point the
go-golang-org-x-crypto package at the protonmail fork (*).  Go
packaging needs to become less cracy.  We don't have to participate in
spreading the dependency hell.

(*) Looking at
<https://github.com/ProtonMail/go-crypto/issues/21#issuecomment-492792917>,
the reason appears to be a lack of maintaining, but looking at
<https://go.googlesource.com/crypto/>, upstream appears to be active
again, so AFAICT they don't have a reason anymore.

Greetings,
Maxime.

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.