I apologize for the rambling nature of this post; I somehow sent this while working on a revision, I should really figure out what keyboard shortcut I keep accidentally hitting to do that, especially when I haven't toned down the language yet. Oh well, please pardon the lack of polish.
—Sam On Thu, May 23, 2019, at 19:22, Sam Whited wrote: > Thank you for writing your reply Ian. Since it's a rather long post > I don't want to go through it point by point, but suffice it to say > that I agree with most of what you've written. However, I also > agree that Go is Google's language, and that in its current form > this is a problem. I'm going to talk about two related but distinct > probles here: > > It's good to have strong central leadership, and I'm okay with that > leadership being employed by Google. The problem is that the Go team > doesn't always appear to be interested in listening to the rest of the > community. We saw this when the modules proposal was created and > rushed out without adequate community feedback; after the push back > against that the Go team promised to do better, but they're still > putting out proposals with little to no opportunity to make > significant changes (eg. the package sum proposal which was put out, > and then almost immediately merged, made into a release, and then made > the default behavior). > > This is especially a problem when these proposals further tie Go to > Google web services run by the Go team (though I'm veering off into a > separate problem here). To me this feels like it's almost a type of > vertical integration and it's an absolutely disgusting thing to do, > and I don't use that word lightly. Not because I think the Go team is > planning on doing anything bad with the information all Go users will > now be sending to them, or because I think Google executives are > putting down mandates and influencing Go, but because we don't know > what future Go team members or Google execs will do. We don't know who > will be running the Go project in 10 or 20 years, so the Go team now > should be making sure they limit the potential for abuse, especially > when they work for a company with a long history of anti- competitive > behavior and abuse of its size and power. > > It's possible that my dissatisfaction with the proposal process is all > merely confirmation bias due to my extreme negative reaction to Go > communicating with Google-run web services that can't be used by large > portions of the world due to U.S. export laws, but I hope the Go team > will still take the feedback in the original link seriously and try to > change the process. -- Sam Whited -- 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. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-nuts/8e351aff-da3f-4db0-b9a0-7f54c1cf73c5%40www.fastmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
