The fact that the organization name and this repository hasn't been updated to reflect the discussion in that thread is telling. The author must just want to be able to add "created standard Go project layout used by X developers and companies" to their resume.
Why is this published in a GitHub org called "golang-standards"?
As someone who has worked with Go for years in a professional capacity, more than half of these folders are not necessary or convention in any sense. They usually introduce complexity into a language and ecosystem that tries very hard to prevent it.
Folks reading this without Go experience, really the only ones that are important are "internal" and "vendor" folders. The former cannot be imported into consuming packages, and the latter is the output of "go mod vendor" (commonly required in corporate environments). "pkg" is also mostly a convention because of projects like Kubernetes, but is not idiomatic either. (A Git repository itself represents a Go package or collection of packages based on the presence of a go.mod or go.work file)
The first time I heard one of those “I can also” lines, I lost interest in ever purchasing an Alexa or frankly any Amazon home product.
Shame the amount of engineering effort that went into that system, only for it to be destroyed by absurd business strategy. I’m sure a couple PMs got a “level 2 to level 3” promotion out of it or something.
Yeah this is the deal breaker for me as well. This smells like an embrace-extend-extinguish campaign frankly?
1. Embrace gRPC and protobuf
2. Extend with Connect, get everyone using this in their APIs and web apps
3. Drift away from established gRPC and/or protobuf standards, build platforms/business around this and trap as many folks as possible
As silly as it may seem, one thing that really sends this signal for me is the nice trademark symbol on the Buf name. their intention for all of this stuff is to build a business.
When I see posts like these, I immediately go to the company’s homepage to see what they’re trying to sell.
One thing that stuck out to me was the “Our technology partners” section. Is Theos actually “partnering” with companies like Google, Meta, Nvidia, OpenAI, etc, on anything? Or is Theos just using technology from these companies? If it is the latter, this seems very misleading.
Web dev for many years chiming in: please step awayyyyy from the ugly solution. As another reply stated, you cannot guarantee pixel-perfect decision without sacrificing other aspects. It’s not something you should strive for at all in {current year}.
If you want to align the text vertically with an image, use flexbox. If the specific font they want to use doesn’t look right in that context, have them either (1) deal with it or (2) pick another font.
I’ve never seen ads. I believe the difference (and potential explanation as to why GP hasn’t seen any either) is that my account is through google workspace.
Based on Google’s documentation on supervised accounts [1], sounds like your child is/was under 13?
They don’t have these checks in place for the fun of it. They’re usually legally mandated, otherwise some parent will sue them because “Google exposed my child to X Y or Z”
Another option people may want to consider is hosting a version of Code Server[1]. I do this with my iPad Pro and it has been incredibly convenient.
I even have it configured so that ports can be routed to via my domain, meaning I can do web development with a local server on port 3000 and view it live at 3000.my.domain.tld.
Former C1 employee here with a personal opinion. C1 is walking the walk; everyone up to the CEO is very tech-forward (which quite surprised me initially)
I’m absolutely a fan of engineering feats like these being made more accessible for educational purposes. Even in college, I built a NES emulator on an FPGA.
But to argue that it’s primary motive is not to facilitate (and potentially profit from) piracy is not grounded in reality.
I’ve been in this position myself. To be fair, you aren’t bootstrapping if you’re taking YC funds, right?
They are seeking returns on this investment in the magnitude seen in previous YC company IPOs, as mentioned in the article. Is a bootstrapped company likely to have that outcome? Possibly, but much less likely than those that have swelled with additional funding rounds and more rapid/predictable public interest.