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

Prevent conflicts with uber-go/atomic. #59

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Conversation

zmt
Copy link

@zmt zmt commented Nov 4, 2019

No description provided.

@abhinav
Copy link
Collaborator

abhinav commented Nov 4, 2019

I wouldn't do this. Right now, the "you must use go.uber.org/atomic" restriction applies only to users of Go modules. Adding the canonical import directive will break users of the library in legacy ecosystems (dep and glide) that are using the old supported import path (uber-go/atomic).

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 4, 2019

Codecov Report

Merging #59 into master will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@          Coverage Diff          @@
##           master    #59   +/-   ##
=====================================
  Coverage     100%   100%           
=====================================
  Files           3      3           
  Lines         145    145           
=====================================
  Hits          145    145
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
atomic.go 100% <ø> (ø) ⬆️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update fb77e1d...f5fbbf1. Read the comment docs.

@prashantv
Copy link
Collaborator

prashantv commented Nov 4, 2019

+1 to @abhinav , see #36 and #13 (comment)

I think requiring go.uber.org/atomic to go modules users is the best tradeoff.

@abhinav
Copy link
Collaborator

abhinav commented Nov 4, 2019

Closing because,

@abhinav abhinav closed this Nov 4, 2019
@zmt zmt deleted the zmt/canonicalImport branch November 5, 2019 06:09
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