5 ms·
Had vgo not included MVS I think they likely would have. But there's a lot of disagreement over the design of vgo which could have been avoided had it just done
by jrs95 8y ago
Had vgo not included MVS I think they likely would have. But there's a lot of disagreement over the design of vgo which could have been avoided had it just done what almost every other recent package manager has done. This is going to make it more painful than it ought to be, but ultimately since this will be the official solution I think it's likely that it will be adopted and that the churn will end since third party tools are no longer necessary.
- stubish 8y agoThird party tools will still be necessary, to work around short comings. I imagine a tool to update all your imports to the latest release will be needed by the majority who don't need reproducible builds, so you get versions with known bugs fixed. MVS seems to be essentially pinning to the oldest possible version, and having that entrenched in your software is going to suck the big tech debt when you do need to update. Hope none of the known bugs are data loss or security related, and good luck monitoring each and every one of your explicit and transient dependencies for updates on a larger project. A tool to update your dependencies to the latest version when convenient or for automated CI tests seems required to me.
- kaeshiwaza 8y agoLook at https://research.swtch.com/vgo-tour https://research.swtch.com/vgo-tour (Upgrading) vgo list -m -u will show you which newer releases of your dependencies. Then you can upgrade one dependencies vgo get xxx or all vgo get -u
- stubish 8y agoExcellent, that seems to address my misgivings. Thanks.