Antoine Beaupré <anar...@debian.org> writes: > On 2024-12-21 10:25:36, Simon Josefsson wrote: >> Hi. It seems golang-goptlib changed namespace between upstream >> releases, and snowflake has to adapt. However, it is possible to solve >> this with a hack in golang-goptlib, so I did that. > > thank you so much! > > btw, you might want to look into: > > https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/anti-censorship/pluggable-transports/snowflake/-/issues/40105#note_3139337 > > and more specifically: > > https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/anti-censorship/pluggable-transports/snowflake/-/issues/40410#note_3139364 > > since we still need to figure out exactly how to ship the latest > snowflake upstream here. your help would be greatly appreciated!
I can't commit to complete this, but I may randomly help and take a look. I think ptutil should be packaged first, and it seems we started to work on that about the same time: https://salsa.debian.org/go-team/packages/golang-gitlab.torproject-tpo-anti-censorship-pluggable-transports-ptutil https://salsa.debian.org/go-team/packages/golang-ptutil I opened an ITP bug for it: #1091143. The package is trivial so I think the only question is about the name... I kind of prefer your 'golang-ptutil' for the source package, or possibly 'golang-torproject-ptutil' to be a bit more descriptive, but in the other thread about naming it was suggested we shouldn't be afraid of the dh-make-golang standardized names, so that means 'golang-gitlab.torproject-tpo-anti-censorship-pluggable-transports-ptutil'. For the binary package, isn't there some advantage in using a Debian package name that matches the Go namespace? I have been assuming that 'dh-make-golang' and other tools find it easier to automatically guess the right package name. So 'golang-gitlab.torproject-tpo-anti-censorship-pluggable-transports-ptutil-dev' rather than 'golang-ptutil-dev'. /Simon
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
