| • Introduction of Go.dev: a user-friendly hub for curated resources for the Go community | |
| • Differences between Go.dev and Golang.org: coexisting websites serving different purposes | |
| • Origins of Go.dev: community feedback, internal recognition of missing features, and subsequent project development | |
| • Package discovery on Go.dev: addressing discoverability issues in the Go ecosystem | |
| • Opinionated package evaluation: taking into account maintenance status, coding standards, and other factors | |
| • Exported functions being removed in new versions of packages can cause significant work for developers | |
| • A listener asked if data on package usage would be made publicly available to help users decide which packages to use based on popularity | |
| • pkg.go.dev provides information on what packages are importing and what packages are importing them, unlike GoDoc which only contains documentation | |
| • Calculating the "popularity" of a package can be complex due to issues like counting individual imports vs grouping them by organization or module | |
| • Considering the quality of dependencies is more important than the quantity, as a large number of low-quality dependencies can cause problems even if they are not directly used | |
| • Package developers should aim for high standards of quality and maintenance, similar to the standard library | |
| • Shining a light on well-tested packages may make it harder for new packages to emerge unless they fill gaps or offer significant improvements | |
| • The benefits of having established companies emerge, which can fill gaps in existing solutions | |
| • Importance of standards rising in a programming ecosystem and how it allows for new innovations | |
| • Examples of packages and libraries that have emerged to solve specific problems not addressed by the standard library | |
| • Challenges faced by companies trying to adopt Go due to lack of information on its use cases and success stories | |
| • Efforts by the Go team to share case studies and stories from big companies using Go, such as American Express, PayPal, and MercadoLibre | |
| • Importance of having case studies and testimonials to influence managers and higher-ups when choosing Go as a technology | |
| • Learning to code vs learning how to influence others to adopt Go | |
| • Using real problems to learn Go, rather than just focusing on theory or details | |
| • Case studies as a valuable resource for adoption, especially for those who want to see what it looks like in practice | |
| • Expanding the Go.dev website to include more community resources, such as events and talks from conferences and meetups | |
| • Plans for future development of Go and pkg.go.dev | |
| • Opening up the Go issue tracker to accepting feedback from the public | |
| • Criteria for including packages in pkg.go.dev's "Popular Packages" and "Featured Packages" | |
| • Managing curated lists vs. automated signals and indicators | |
| • Ways for package authors to indicate deprecation or recommend alternative packages | |
| • Discussion around licensing and permissions for open-source code | |
| • Need for better tools to detect license compliance issues | |
| • Potential for a customized tool to flag non-compliant imports | |
| • Importance of checking licenses before importing code | |
| • The role of Go.dev in reporting package licenses and excluding non-redistributable content | |
| • Tech stack: HTML/CSS, limited JavaScript, Google Cloud Platform | |
| • System architecture: data ingestion system, Postgres database, Redis caching | |
| • Google App Engine usage for deploying and scaling | |
| • Unpopular opinions shared by guests: | |
| + Julie Qiu's preference for NYC buses over subways/cabs | |
| + Steve Francia's opinion that Windows is the best operating system | |
| + Discussion of Windows features (e.g. Windows Subsystem for Linux, Bash) | |
| + Mat Ryer's nostalgia for Minesweeper and XP | |
| • Learn.go.dev's purpose is to provide a collaborative platform for learning Go | |
| • The platform aims to fill gaps in existing learning resources, particularly for those with little or no coding experience and professionals who need specific skills | |
| • Codeacademy partnership provides free courses for beginners | |
| • Curated learning journeys are being developed for common use cases and industries | |
| • Two different psychological mindsets are targeted: exploratory learners and enterprise adopters | |
| • Future plans include internationalization, accessibility features, and collaboration with the community | |
| • The platform will be curated by trusted individuals, with potential voting features to be considered in the future | |
| • Discussion of gamification mechanisms and voting systems on Go.dev | |
| • Importance of community involvement and feedback in shaping the site's features | |
| • Comparison between Go.dev and existing resources such as Reddit and Twitter communities | |
| • Challenges of balancing scope and depth in curating resources for a wide audience | |
| • Plans for internationalization and potential future additions to the site |