On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 5:22 PM, Arnaud Rebillout <[email protected]> wrote: > Dear go packaging team, > > lately I've been doing my best to try to package the current version of > Docker in Debian. My approach was 'bottom-up': I listed all the > dependencies, and tried to bump every pacakge to the latest version. I > thought that in order to package the latest version of Docker, I needed the > latest version of all its dependencies. > > Now I finally realize how wrong I was. In the world of go, there's often no > stable api, no backward compatibility, even no release, that why we end up > packaging some random git sha. So basically, applications vendor their > dependencies, and they won't work with an older version (because it's too > old and miss something), but it won't work either with a newer version > (because, hey, no release, no backward compatibility). > > So I made a beginner mistake, but I'm learning, and hopefully I'm on the > right track ! > > But now I face a dilemna. > > The current version of Docker vendors `containerd` somewhere between > `v1.0.0-alpha3` and `v1.0.0-alpha4`. While I already packaged containerd to > `v1.0.2`. There's almost 6 months of difference between them, and no, docker > (or more specifically its dependency swarmkit) does not build. > > So I could re-package containerd to an older version. But if I do this > choice, I basically admit that Docker decides of the version of all its > dependencies, possibly holding back all of them. What if someone needs a > pretty recent version of containerd (or any other Docker dependency), and we > can't deliver that because we're waiting for Docker to bump the version it > vendors, and we have no idea when it will happen ?
The docker maintainers have already packaged docker-containerd, and docker-runc. see #877146 for reasons why this happened. > > The other solution is to keep a vendored version of containerd within > Docker, just the way it's already done in Docker. I'm personally fine with > that, but it seems that it's not the Debian way. But maybe in this situation > it makes sense. > > I don't know what's the best way to deal with this situation, so if anyone > from the team can provide some advice, that would be super welcome ! > > Thanks ! > > Arnaud > > > _______________________________________________ > Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers -- Best regards, Shengjing Zhu _______________________________________________ Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers
