4 ms·

I don't understand what you mean, sorry

Cyph0n 8y ago
Think of it this way: if you spend time learning and using a feature that is not guaranteed to be there, say, a year down the line, is that a good investment?
- throwaway2048 8y ago
  Its not like there is much of a barrier there.
- AsyncAwait 8y ago
  > a feature that is not guaranteed to be there, say, a year down the line, is that a good investment? The Go devs have been extremely clear that Go modules is THE solution to Go packages.
  - geezerjay 8y ago
    If they do mean what they say then they will release a version of Go where the GOPAH nonsense is over and a fix for that design problem is not euphemistically described as experimental. Until then, no LTS means not ready for production.
    - AsyncAwait 8y ago
      GOPATH is still being used internally by Go modules, but it's set up automatically and you never have to even know it's there. It will probably remain an option to use it as a user for a while due to backward compatibility. I don't see how that prevents you from using Go modules. > a fix for that design problem is not euphemistically described as experimental The simple reason for it being "experimental" is because Go 1.11 is the first release to include it, not because of some inherent instability. Wait till February for Go 1.12 if you're so worried. > no LTS means not ready for production I don't know what you mean by LTS here, since every Go release as of 1.0 has been backwards compatible.
- _ph_ 8y ago
  Learning Go modules is a minimal investment. It is rather hours than days.
threeseed 8y ago
Experimental and production are two words that should be used together.
PeterisP 8y ago
For some people and organizations "as un-risky as anything labelled "experimental" could be" is risky enough to be automatically being disqualified from even being considered. There's the label 'experimental', so it can't be used anywhere touching the production codebase regardless of any other arguments.

Think of it this way: if you spend time learning and using a feature that is not guaranteed to be there, say, a year down the line, is that a good investment?

throwaway2048 8y ago
Its not like there is much of a barrier there.
AsyncAwait 8y ago
> a feature that is not guaranteed to be there, say, a year down the line, is that a good investment? The Go devs have been extremely clear that Go modules is THE solution to Go packages.
- geezerjay 8y ago
  If they do mean what they say then they will release a version of Go where the GOPAH nonsense is over and a fix for that design problem is not euphemistically described as experimental. Until then, no LTS means not ready for production.
  - AsyncAwait 8y ago
    GOPATH is still being used internally by Go modules, but it's set up automatically and you never have to even know it's there. It will probably remain an option to use it as a user for a while due to backward compatibility. I don't see how that prevents you from using Go modules. > a fix for that design problem is not euphemistically described as experimental The simple reason for it being "experimental" is because Go 1.11 is the first release to include it, not because of some inherent instability. Wait till February for Go 1.12 if you're so worried. > no LTS means not ready for production I don't know what you mean by LTS here, since every Go release as of 1.0 has been backwards compatible.
_ph_ 8y ago
Learning Go modules is a minimal investment. It is rather hours than days.

threeseed 8y ago

Experimental and production are two words that should be used together.

PeterisP 8y ago

For some people and organizations "as un-risky as anything labelled "experimental" could be" is risky enough to be automatically being disqualified from even being considered. There's the label 'experimental', so it can't be used anywhere touching the production codebase regardless of any other arguments.