Re: [PATCH] add address@hidden

[Alex Griffin]

Matthew,

I don't think we should consider minimum requirements, because Go's
backward compatibility is really good. I have yet to come across a
package that builds with an older compiler (post-1.0) but not a newer
one. Instead I think we should consider which releases we actually need
and which are supported upstream. The Go Release Policy[1] says that
security fixes are only issued for the current and previous releases.

I had thought that the 1.5 series was EOL already but when I looked it
up I guess it's still supported until next month. So I guess I don't
really have any objections to packaging go 1.5, except that it should be
removed next month when go 1.7 is released.

Thanks,
-- 
Alex Griffin

[1]: https://golang.org/doc/devel/release.html


On Tue, Jul 12, 2016, at 04:47 AM, Matthew Jordan wrote:
> Good Day Alex,
> 
> > Can I ask why even package go 1.5? Upstream has committed to making sure
> > all future compiler versions can bootstrap from go 1.4.x, so my thinking
> > is that we only need to package two versions, go 1.4 and the latest
> > version (1.6.2 at the moment). Or am I missing something?
> 
> Some packages still recommend building with address@hidden or have 
> address@hidden as
> the minimum requirement. So thought it would be a good idea to add
> address@hidden as well.
> 
> However I have no objections towards going straight to address@hidden
> 
> Respectfully,
> 
> ---
> Matthew Jordan