Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A little Golang way

aerofs.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–194 of 194 posts

Re: A little Golang way

#191

Post by serge2k »

s73v3r wrote: post #99
staunch wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Statically linking your SSL library makes you an asshole...Heartbleed 2.0. Go has its own SSL library, crypto/tls, which is not linked to any C libraries and wasn't affected by Heartbleed 1.0. You haven't written much Go if you don't know that. The argument is specious anyway, there's nothing difficult about building a binary from an old version of your code or just upgrading in most cases. Deploying a new Go binar…

"Go has its own SSL library, crypto/tls, which is not linked to any C libraries and wasn't affected by Heartbleed 1.0." Is it going to be affected by Heartbleet 2.0? How about whatever the next exploit is? "The argument is specious anyway, there's nothing difficult about building a binary from an old version of your code or just upgrading in most cases." Not in every case, and not for customers who don't have access…

No, it will just have its own vulnerabilities instead.

Re: A little Golang way

#192

Post by aikah »

ansible wrote: post #189
aikah wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's a community project after all. It is absolutely not a community project. Go governance is a 100% @ Google . There is no go committee or go working group outside Google. It's backed by one company that has full control over it. Sure it's open-source, but good luck with a fork. How can anybody be so misleading about that fact ? What did make you think Go is a "community project" ? > but that does not mean it dep…

I still want to know what made you think Go is a "community project". Well, the main developers do listen to the community. Any project can fork, if there are enough people who are very dissatisfied with the current management. I'm not aware of any serious grumblings about such a fork though. Why? The core team is very good, and very narrowly focused. They've communicated clearly on nearly every issue as to what they…

> I could see people getting together to form a non-profit foundation that could at least pay for a few guys to continue to work on Go full-time.

It's not going to happen, for the same reason the biggest startups in the Silicon Valley never came together to write their own language before. Let's get things straight, the only people who control Go is the Go team period. You are not talking about facts, so i'm not sure what is the point of your comment.

Re: A little Golang way

#193

Post by ansible »

aikah wrote: post #192
ansible wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I still want to know what made you think Go is a "community project". Well, the main developers do listen to the community. Any project can fork, if there are enough people who are very dissatisfied with the current management. I'm not aware of any serious grumblings about such a fork though. Why? The core team is very good, and very narrowly focused. They've communicated clearly on nearly every issue as to what they…

> I could see people getting together to form a non-profit foundation that could at least pay for a few guys to continue to work on Go full-time. It's not going to happen, for the same reason the biggest startups in the Silicon Valley never came together to write their own language before. Let's get things straight, the only people who control Go is the Go team period. You are not talking about facts, so i'm not sure…

The point I was trying to make is that the golang community has a lot of respect for the current core team. If the community didn't have that respect, then I speculate that there would be a fork (or takeover), and it would then look more like the kind of community-controlled project that you seem to prefer.

This kind of thing has happened in the past: XFree86, OpenOffice, gcc, etc.

Re: A little Golang way

#194

Post by _ak »

davexunit wrote: post #102
_ak wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You should rather ask yourself why Lisp hasn't been able to attract the same large and active community in 5 decades that Go has been able to attract in 5 years.

Argument ad populum.

I'm not saying either of them is better because or the amount of people they attracted. I merely ask why Go managed to interest more people than Lisp in an order of magnitude of time less.
Post reply on HN