-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 18k
cmd/go: show why indirect dependencies are needed #26620
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
Comments
The |
Since
|
For builds involving a lot of packages that could get pretty ungainly, and it would potentially add a lot of unnecessary diffs as the set of packages changes over time. |
Hm. The current behaviour looks quite broken to me, I can't explain the output of this. Is it because the vast majority of the packages don't have their own concrete mod files yet? It's confusing that it shows all of these as hanoverd imports - in reality hanoverd only imports a couple of packages, including docker, which results in quite a large tree. But then, gopkg.in/[email protected] gets its own line presumably because it is the only one with a mod file? Output of `go mod graph`
|
I think so, yes. Was |
Yes. |
Change https://golang.org/cl/128359 mentions this issue: |
@rsc: I'm concerned that the above CL might not actually fix the issue presented. I understand there are two things going on, (1) you are addressing, and (2) not obviously?
It's perhaps not explicitly clear, but in the outputs of I'd expect this is intended to be shown in |
What version of Go are you using (
go version
)?go version go1.11beta2 darwin/amd64
What did you do?
What did you expect to see?
Reason why
gopherjs
or any other indirect dependency added to mod file.What did you see instead?
No simple way to understand why indirect dependencies added to mod file.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: