71–78 of 78 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why fork it then? Why just not use the existing process?
Because forking IS the process on GitHub. People and teams with no write access to the main repo can fork it and submit a pull request.
In general, corps only fork a repo when they want end users to use their repo.
In the case of development by corp's developers, they just generally fork it themselves and submit PRs from their accounts.
so I can see the confusion.
Hi! I’m one of the engineers on this. We’ve got some work we’re collaborating on - all of which is going upstream - and we wanted a shared place to stage it while we prepare PRs. I’ll be pushing a statement to our fork tomorrow. (I’m personally working on Bazel rules and contributions to lib/Syntax. If you find that exciting, please get in touch! :)
Thank God. Otherwise this seemed like a very Microsoft/Java strategy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
maybe 'was'? kotlin is the official google's recommendation for android now... (and kotlin can have multiple 'backends' -- e.g. build-to-java / native / web / etc)
Kotlin could just be a stopgap, though. It’s still a JVM language so it’s an easier migration, and from what little I’ve seen it doesn’t add very much other than syntactic sugar for null checks.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not a "made up title", Google did in fact fork Swift on GitHub. That doesn't mean anything in an of itself, thousands of people/organizations have also done so, but it's mildly interesting since it's Google, and because it was posted here, we now know why. Don't see a problem.
The problem is that "fork" means two different things at this point. Compare "FFmpeg developers fork FFmpeg" in the sense of "...and create libav" and in the sense of "...so they can submit pull requests." One is extremely newsworthy, one is extremely not. If you're posting something to HN, it's a reasonable assumption that readers will think you're posting a newsworthy thing as opposed to not.
This posting let you know their intention. Isn't it newsworthy?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I see your point. Thank you for your opinion, and I don't agree. Please see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15701539 for why.
No, that doesn't make sense. You didn't think they merely made a github clone - as you yourself said above, you thought Google was going to make their own version of the language. You posted suggesting that they are. But it wasn't true. People working at Google had to correct you. Other users flagged your post into oblivion. Those thing wouldn't have happened if the title wasn't wildly inaccurate. You should have tri…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem is that "fork" means two different things at this point. Compare "FFmpeg developers fork FFmpeg" in the sense of "...and create libav" and in the sense of "...so they can submit pull requests." One is extremely newsworthy, one is extremely not. If you're posting something to HN, it's a reasonable assumption that readers will think you're posting a newsworthy thing as opposed to not.
How do you know the intention of a fork without their own explanation? It was unknown at the point of posting, and posting title is still technically valid. This posting let you know their intention. Isn't it newsworthy?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I see your point. Thank you for your opinion, and I don't agree. Please see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15701539 for why.
No, that doesn't make sense. You didn't think they merely made a github clone - as you yourself said above, you thought Google was going to make their own version of the language. You posted suggesting that they are. But it wasn't true. People working at Google had to correct you. Other users flagged your post into oblivion. Those thing wouldn't have happened if the title wasn't wildly inaccurate. You should have tri…
- I was worried about Google's intention, but I didn't claim one.
- I chose the word "fork" because it was what actually happen. I tried to be dry as much as possible to deliver just a fact. Making people confused was not my intention. Anyway, I'm sorry for that confusion.
- I didn't think the word "fork" is abusive or bad wording at the point of posting. I simply forgot the other meaning of "fork" at the point of posting. Now I remembered how it's different.
- Now I agree that the word "fork" could make you (and many other people) confused. I'm sorry.
- If the wording "fork" made you confused, I think you also need to blame Github for why they didn't use the word "clone" on their website.
- I blame Github because this is major reason of why I forgot the other meaning of "fork" nowadays.
- You are telling me to find out before posting this to here, but how? At the point of posting, there was literally no one was discussing on this. No one around me could explain Google's intention. I googled, and there was no result. If you know a good place to ask, please let me know. I'd love it.
- Google engineers came and explained their intention. IMO, this posting ended up in the best way it could.