On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 1:43 AM Dave Cheney <d...@cheney.net> wrote: T L, I often hear this comment when a central repo for Go is proposed/suggested/requested. Are you able to give details of the things you do not like about Maven/npm/rubygems central repos. The most specific the better please.
I think this isn't really a fair question when posed in such a general way. If you're looking for specific feedback, it would be really helpful if you can provide a concrete proposal for folks to critique. Treating the existing Go packaging ecosystem as a specific example, I will mention one thing that I like about it: When it comes time for me to make a package available to others to use, it's nice to know it'll stay available — online — but high availability is difficult. Many packages aren't important enough for me (or my company) to spend the effort required to do a more thorough job at this than github, so we can just throw them up in a github repo and call it a day. But when github becomes unavailable due to a DDoS on the DNS, those packages will also be unavailable. For very important packages, we have the option of hosting them ourselves and assuming full responsibility. https://www.whoownsmyavailability.com/ We can set up redundant DNS servers, edge caches, and whatever else is warranted by the situation. Because the 'go' tool doesn't require packages to be hosted in any one particular place, we can take as much responsibility or as little effort as we need, depending on the package. This tradeoff is available in several important systems on the internet, such as HTTP, and I'm glad Go has it too. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
