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

Re: Go (golang) packaging, part 2

* Roland Mas:

> Hilko Bengen, 2013-02-06 14:46:11 +0100 :
> [...]
>> I am pretty sure that if you asked about packaging software in the
>> Python, Perl, Ruby, Java, Lua communities, you would get recommendations
>> to not use Debian packages at all and get pointers to what the
>> respective community considers a solution to the packaging problem (if
>> they see it as a problem at all).
>   I can only speak about Python and Perl, but I don't remember *ever*
> having been told to use their deployment system instead of the packaged
> versions of the interpreter and modules.  The closest I've seen is
> something like "if you're running CentOS or RHEL, then you'll need this
> plethora of modules that are not packaged, so please use our
> language-specific system to install them instead".

I have heard exactly what I described at Perl conferences more than
once. The root cause may have been that some versions of RHEL still ship
Perl 5.8.something and ancient, broken versions of some modules, but I
had the impression that some (not all) people over-generalized this view
to every Linux distribution, including Debian.

If you need or want to run the current stable Perl (5.16.2) and the
latest-greatest modules on wheezy, it's going to be in your best
interest to use things like perlbrew and local::lib (which are both
shipped with Debian).

That upstream's preferences may differ from ours is not even a problem,
as long as no-one tries to enforce his values on users. I don't see such
attempts in the Perl and Go communities.

>   So it is possible for a language community to work with the
> distributors rather than against.

And it's possible for Debian to at least *try* to work with any language

Simply calling people "idiots" when one hasn't yet understood the other
community's values/interests/position does not help, of course. ;-)


Reply to: