4 ms·
I don’t really get this distinction. “Google as a corporation” isn’t a thing, it’s a collection of people, some of whom happen to be the Go core team. It’s like
by jon-wood 7y ago
I don’t really get this distinction. “Google as a corporation” isn’t a thing, it’s a collection of people, some of whom happen to be the Go core team. It’s likely that due to being close to Go developers at Google there’s a bias towards implementing features that would help those people, but I very much doubt the subject of genetics in Go comes up at board meetings.
- dx034 7y agoGoogle the corporation is represented by upper management, the people by developers. The question is if upper management at Google takes any influence on the development process.
- fragmede 7y agoImplementing features Google needs sooner, rather than later, is one thing, but at some point, Google-the-profit-driven-corporation's needs will contradict the broader Golang community's needs, at which point the question is who "wins"? What will, on a long enough timeline, come up in board meetings, especially as Google fails to meet Wall Street analyst's expectations, and as the ad-tech space evolves, is how much of Google-the-corporation's money to continue plowing into broader community things, like Golang at all. Hopefully, by the time that happens, the community will be strong enough to persist, and I use Golang professionally, so I have personal investment for that to be true, but the possible eventuality that it'll end up being in the situation Java is currently in, makes me nervous.