[Pkg-anonymity-tools] meek debian packaging brainstorming

[intrigeri]

Jérémy Bobbio wrote (29 Sep 2014 12:53:29 GMT) :
> Packaging Go stuff is a somewhat of a joke. All the dependencies must be
> packaged, but this is just to make sources available to build a static
> binary in the end. So there's hardly any surprises in the process, or at
> least none of the complications of packaging shared libraries.

... and then, instead, we have to deal with rounds of binNMU's to have
bugfixes in a library propagate to its reverse-build-dependencies?

(I'm neither competent, nor willing, to have a general discussion
about the general pros and cons of static vs. dynamic linking.
Just trying to get an idea of what are the practical implications to
add more Go stuff to our plate :)

-- 
intrigeri