4 ms·

> The cynical side of me feels like this is a way for Google to collect analytics on the Go ecosystem > other ecosystems demanded it due to cargo culting the i

> The cynical side of me feels like this is a way for Google to collect analytics on the Go ecosystem > other ecosystems demanded it due to cargo culting the idea And there it is, the hallmark of a typical comment on a thread like this * Cynical * Expresses concern about data being collected even though this data can't possibly be used for anything bad. (If you disagree, go to crates.io and tell me what concerns you have). * Expresses disapproval of a large corporation even though they haven't done anything wrong here. * Pithy dismissal of other programmers by calling them names ("cargo cult"). This change improves speed of downloads by 6-7x on poor connections and 3x on good connections. Clearly this is helpful for situations like CI which typically involve clean builds. What's the issue here exactly? * Furious attack on a free product that's completely optional to use. If you want to keep vendoring your dependencies, go ahead and do that. Why are you angry that some people are going to use this proxy?

eeZah7Ux 7y ago
That's a good example of cargo culting. (Also the downvotes this message is getting. Nobody can dare to question The Google.)
- heyoni 7y ago
  What’s cargo culting exactly? Seriously asking
  - JoeAltmaier 7y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargo_cult https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargo_cult
    - heyoni 7y ago
      Thank you sir!
donatj 7y ago
"Furious attack". For serious? I gave a light hearted criticism of adding a single lynchpin to the entire Go ecosystem. I think that's a legitimate source of concern. I was by no means pithy, I was by no means being dismissive. Thinking you need something just because you had it elsewhere is the definition of cargo culting - and is something the Go developers have otherwise largely avoided. Just because something is faster doesn't make it better or worth it, particularly when it comes with tradeoffs and is already really fast - which is my argument - that the tradeoffs aren't worth the benefit.
- nindalf 7y ago
  This is not a single point of failure. It's by no means a legitimate concern. Go read the proposal. If you don't want to use proxy.golang.org, use goproxy.io. Or host your private one. Fairly sure you'll be able to use github soon as well. Do whatever. I notice you couldn't back up your FUD about analytics being collected. Go programmers are happy that they have a solution where their dependencies (and specific versions of those dependencies) will be available forever without them having to take the trouble of vendoring. Your dismissive response? Just vendor. They're happy that clean builds are faster, saving CI time. Your response? It doesn't need to be faster.
  - donatj 7y ago
    You're doing the same thing you're criticising, being dismissive of my concern. > If you don't want to use proxy.golang.org, use goproxy.io Yes, I can do that, but as I mentioned in my original post having to get an entire team of people and fleet of CI systems to use a non-standard configuration which is not communiciable in the project repo is a minor PITA. If and when proxy.golang.org has a bad day, builds will fail. Go developers will have a bad day. Having the ability to work around it doesn't make it not a lynchpin. As for the "FUD about analytics being collected" it was an offhanded quip. I thought it read pretty clearly as not entirely serious hence the prefix "The cynical side of me feels" and not "I feel". It doesn't merit the effort of defending.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
steveklabnik 7y ago
> (If you disagree, go to crates.io and tell me what concerns you have). We had a number of people express concerns with data tracking on crates.io, including google analytics, GDPR compliance, etc. We've since removed GA and had to talk to lawyers about GDPR, etc.
- nindalf 7y ago
  That's reasonable. I can see how GDPR would be tricky considering that a core feature is prevention of yanking of crates, a right that GDPR guarantees. I can also see why people might have concerns about Google Analytics. I'm happy that crates.io has removed it. But this is likely not the point that GP was making. His FUD about analytics was somehow implying that module download statistics could somehow be used for nefarious purposes.
SheinhardtWigCo 7y ago
It is naive to suggest that this data can't possibly be used for anything bad. This change results in Google collecting a lot more information about the software that is being created outside of Google. After this change, Go developers working on private projects will end up regularly transmitting their lists of dependencies to Google, unless the risks are properly understood and preventative steps are taken. Google's business is collecting and monetizing information. It is entirely reasonable and appropriate to express cynicism about new initiatives that result in mass data collection.

eeZah7Ux 7y ago

That's a good example of cargo culting. (Also the downvotes this message is getting. Nobody can dare to question The Google.)

heyoni 7y ago
What’s cargo culting exactly? Seriously asking
- JoeAltmaier 7y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargo_cult https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargo_cult
  - heyoni 7y ago
    Thank you sir!

donatj 7y ago

"Furious attack". For serious? I gave a light hearted criticism of adding a single lynchpin to the entire Go ecosystem. I think that's a legitimate source of concern. I was by no means pithy, I was by no means being dismissive. Thinking you need something just because you had it elsewhere is the definition of cargo culting - and is something the Go developers have otherwise largely avoided. Just because something is faster doesn't make it better or worth it, particularly when it comes with tradeoffs and is already really fast - which is my argument - that the tradeoffs aren't worth the benefit.

nindalf 7y ago
This is not a single point of failure. It's by no means a legitimate concern. Go read the proposal. If you don't want to use proxy.golang.org, use goproxy.io. Or host your private one. Fairly sure you'll be able to use github soon as well. Do whatever. I notice you couldn't back up your FUD about analytics being collected. Go programmers are happy that they have a solution where their dependencies (and specific versions of those dependencies) will be available forever without them having to take the trouble of vendoring. Your dismissive response? Just vendor. They're happy that clean builds are faster, saving CI time. Your response? It doesn't need to be faster.
- donatj 7y ago
  You're doing the same thing you're criticising, being dismissive of my concern. > If you don't want to use proxy.golang.org, use goproxy.io Yes, I can do that, but as I mentioned in my original post having to get an entire team of people and fleet of CI systems to use a non-standard configuration which is not communiciable in the project repo is a minor PITA. If and when proxy.golang.org has a bad day, builds will fail. Go developers will have a bad day. Having the ability to work around it doesn't make it not a lynchpin. As for the "FUD about analytics being collected" it was an offhanded quip. I thought it read pretty clearly as not entirely serious hence the prefix "The cynical side of me feels" and not "I feel". It doesn't merit the effort of defending.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]

steveklabnik 7y ago

> (If you disagree, go to crates.io and tell me what concerns you have). We had a number of people express concerns with data tracking on crates.io, including google analytics, GDPR compliance, etc. We've since removed GA and had to talk to lawyers about GDPR, etc.

nindalf 7y ago
That's reasonable. I can see how GDPR would be tricky considering that a core feature is prevention of yanking of crates, a right that GDPR guarantees. I can also see why people might have concerns about Google Analytics. I'm happy that crates.io has removed it. But this is likely not the point that GP was making. His FUD about analytics was somehow implying that module download statistics could somehow be used for nefarious purposes.

SheinhardtWigCo 7y ago

It is naive to suggest that this data can't possibly be used for anything bad. This change results in Google collecting a lot more information about the software that is being created outside of Google. After this change, Go developers working on private projects will end up regularly transmitting their lists of dependencies to Google, unless the risks are properly understood and preventative steps are taken. Google's business is collecting and monetizing information. It is entirely reasonable and appropriate to express cynicism about new initiatives that result in mass data collection.