Circular deps between btcutil and btcd, and tons of duplicated deps with different versions because the versions are inconsistent about btcd

[kcalvinalvin]

(All things aside) what was the thing you were trying to do? Maybe I could help out there. btcd's main package isn't really meant for outside usage, each of the individual packages are.

[guggero]

We're aware of that. Still looking for reviewers of #1825.

[benma]

@kcalvinalvin

(All things aside) what was the thing you were trying to do? Maybe I could help out there.

We are using it in a few projects and I noticed that I could not get rid of the many duplicated deps and wondered why.

btcd's main package isn't really meant for outside usage, each of the individual packages are.

Why not? It's a perfectly usable library. I make use of the wire package a lot to parse Bitcoin transactions, or use the txscript package for various things. These are not nested modules either - what is the benefit of having btcutil being a nested module?

Nested modules are kind of confusing and seem hard to maintain anyway, seems more natural to just make it a package - would there be a downside to that?

[kcalvinalvin]

Why not? It's a perfectly usable library. I make use of the wire package a lot to parse Bitcoin transactions, or use the txscript package for various things. These are not nested modules either - what is the benefit of having btcutil being a nested module?

Not much besides that it's just been like that.

Nested modules are kind of confusing and seem hard to maintain anyway, seems more natural to just make it a package - would there be a downside to that?

Not that I can think of.