Re: Reintroducing src:toxiproxy for its -dev package
On Thu, Nov 24, 2022 at 08:11:19AM +0530, Nilesh Patra wrote:
>
> On 24 November 2022 7:34:58 am IST, Mathias Gibbens <gibmat@debian.org> wrote:
> > I've been working on updating/packaging several golang packages (plus
> >their own dependencies) that will be needed by new feature releases of
> >LXD. I'm trying to keep ahead of the large changes in LXD's dependency
> >tree so eventually when the 6.0 LTS lands (still quite a while out) it
> >will be trivial to update the package in Debian.
> >
> > One rabbit hole I've wandered down is needing to update golang-
> >github-shopify-sarama, which has a dependency on
> >github.com/Shopify/toxiproxy. That used to be packaged as toxiproxy,
> >but was RM'ed in bug #940453. I'd like to reintroduce the -dev package
> >as a build dependency, but am not too keen on reintroducing an actual
> >binary package shipping the `toxiproxy` command (and its related
> >service files, etc).
> >
> > Would there be any objections to me filing an ITP to reintroduce
> >src:toxiproxy that would only build bin:toxiproxy-dev, and (at least
> >for the time being) not building bin:toxyproxy or bin:toxyproxy-cli? Or
> >maybe there would be a better way to handle this -- I'm open to any
> >other suggestions.
>
> I remember hearing it from Shengjing sometime that we only need a subset of code from some packages, but
> then, we end up packaging everything in the corresponding B-D and end up with a monster package (which I tend to agree with).
toxiproxy doesn't seem to be a monster. It only has 6 dependencies.
https://github.com/Shopify/toxiproxy/blob/master/go.mod
No objections, but could you use the new convention for the -dev package,
which should be golang-github-shopify-toxiproxy-dev.
When you reintroduce some packages, there's no need to keep the old name.
It's just like packaging new package.
Reply to: