Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

chore(deps): Make Apostille Go-Gettable Again #8

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 30, 2017
Merged

Conversation

ecordell
Copy link
Contributor

This PR kind of sucks.

I had switched over to using vendetta to manage dependencies (which just does a very simple thing - adds dependencies as submodules under the vendor directory).

Unfortunately, that made it so that go get wouldn't work for apostille anymore. go get understands submodules just fine, but you can't add any additional processing steps.

We have to remove the nested vendor directories in docker/notary and docker/distribution in order for apostille to build, because go doesn't deal well with nested dependencies. For details see: golang/go#12432

So we have to store all of the vendored files in the repo for realsies :(

@jzelinskie
Copy link

You should make sure this use case is represented in the design of the official go tool, dep.

@ecordell
Copy link
Contributor Author

ecordell commented Jan 27, 2017

@jzelinskie I think this user story covers it:

US8 As a consumer, I want the option of including or excluding a dependency’s test code and its dependencies. [2x neutral] [2x positive] 2

also this:

US28 As a user of Go software, I want go get (or some new, similar command) to still work, but to transparently utilize lock information as needed in order to produce exactly the compiled binary/ies the author intended.

Copy link
Contributor

@charltonaustin charltonaustin left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't have a lot of context, but LGTM

@ecordell ecordell merged commit 2f952bc into master Jan 30, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants