4 ms·

Throwing away dep means also throwing away the nontechnical groundwork that dep was built on - for instance, user research. Seems pretty careless to me, especia

Throwing away dep means also throwing away the nontechnical groundwork that dep was built on - for instance, user research. Seems pretty careless to me, especially when the alternative is the product of one person's thinking on the subject done in a vacuum without the input of an entire committee of smart, reasonable people who have literally spent years diving into this specific domain.

Athas 8y ago
Why do you think vgo wasn't built on the nontechnical research carried out by dep? In fact, that's normally what I would assume would be the purpose of something branded an "official experiment" - the code will for certain be thrown away eventually, but the experiences gained will be used to create the actual final product.
geodel 8y ago
> without the input of an entire committee of smart, reasonable people who have literally spent years diving into this specific domain. If that is the case why the solution wasn't developed already outside of Go team's ambit. After all Go team said multiple times they don't need module system as Google does not use it.
- cweagans 8y ago
  A solution was in progress before Russ preempted it with his own thing: dep.
pa7ch 8y ago
As a user of dep, glide, godep and avid reader of vgo technical docs I favor vgo's solution. I've been a professional Go developer a few years now. The notion that this committee speaks for the community seems a weak one to me and I've seen my view mirrored with many of my peers. Its good they attempted such research but it seems like confirmation bias as dep just seemed like a re-write of glide with similar fundamentals and a improved user experience. This appeal to authority by the committee to represent the Go community seems unproductive and unnecessarily divisive/misleading. I wasn't thrilled when I saw become Sam elected to lead the implementation of the "official experiment" because I wasn't a fan of Glide at all. There was no community vote to oversee this, just one maintainer of one flavor of go pkg management was declared the expert and just re-wrote the existing Glide solution with some lesson's learned. Many other maintainers (experts) of other go pkg management solutions favor vgo. I've navigated many thorny dependency problems in Go before and never have I ever been convinced that the solution was NP complete version constraints. MVS, good tooling, and finally SIV is enough to make this miles better then previous attempts in this space. Also hooray for GOPATH elimination and project based workflows I've always loved GB by Dave Cheney.
- kaeshiwaza 8y ago
  I have exactly the same feeling. And remember at the time of the start of Dep that there was no consensus and a big hope that the final integrated solution will be more Goish than Glide. Very surprised by the begin of Dep. I don't believe that rsc and the go team didn't know since the begin that it will not fit sooner or later...
DannyBee 8y ago
"specially when the alternative is the product of one person's thinking on the subject done in a vacuum without the input of an entire committee of smart, reasonable people who have literally spent years diving into this specific domain." Even this very article contradicts your assertion about how it was done.
mseepgood 8y ago
> for instance, user research "If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses." (or yet another Bundler/npm/Cargo clone.)

Athas 8y ago

Why do you think vgo wasn't built on the nontechnical research carried out by dep? In fact, that's normally what I would assume would be the purpose of something branded an "official experiment" - the code will for certain be thrown away eventually, but the experiences gained will be used to create the actual final product.

geodel 8y ago

> without the input of an entire committee of smart, reasonable people who have literally spent years diving into this specific domain. If that is the case why the solution wasn't developed already outside of Go team's ambit. After all Go team said multiple times they don't need module system as Google does not use it.

cweagans 8y ago
A solution was in progress before Russ preempted it with his own thing: dep.

pa7ch 8y ago

As a user of dep, glide, godep and avid reader of vgo technical docs I favor vgo's solution. I've been a professional Go developer a few years now. The notion that this committee speaks for the community seems a weak one to me and I've seen my view mirrored with many of my peers. Its good they attempted such research but it seems like confirmation bias as dep just seemed like a re-write of glide with similar fundamentals and a improved user experience. This appeal to authority by the committee to represent the Go community seems unproductive and unnecessarily divisive/misleading. I wasn't thrilled when I saw become Sam elected to lead the implementation of the "official experiment" because I wasn't a fan of Glide at all. There was no community vote to oversee this, just one maintainer of one flavor of go pkg management was declared the expert and just re-wrote the existing Glide solution with some lesson's learned. Many other maintainers (experts) of other go pkg management solutions favor vgo. I've navigated many thorny dependency problems in Go before and never have I ever been convinced that the solution was NP complete version constraints. MVS, good tooling, and finally SIV is enough to make this miles better then previous attempts in this space. Also hooray for GOPATH elimination and project based workflows I've always loved GB by Dave Cheney.

kaeshiwaza 8y ago
I have exactly the same feeling. And remember at the time of the start of Dep that there was no consensus and a big hope that the final integrated solution will be more Goish than Glide. Very surprised by the begin of Dep. I don't believe that rsc and the go team didn't know since the begin that it will not fit sooner or later...

DannyBee 8y ago

"specially when the alternative is the product of one person's thinking on the subject done in a vacuum without the input of an entire committee of smart, reasonable people who have literally spent years diving into this specific domain." Even this very article contradicts your assertion about how it was done.

mseepgood 8y ago

> for instance, user research "If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses." (or yet another Bundler/npm/Cargo clone.)