Debian users vote for someone to become Debian Developer and give him right to vote? If no, how can it be "representative"?
пн, 27 мая 2019 г. в 08:35, 'Axel Wagner' via golang-nuts < golang-nuts@googlegroups.com>: > This is a bit of an aside, I agree with everything Ian said, but: > > On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 7:59 PM Ian Lance Taylor <i...@golang.org> wrote: > >> If a language is to change over time, this specification or >> implementation must change. Somebody has to decide how changes will >> be made. All successful languages have a small set of people who make >> the final decisions. >> >> *Many people will provide input to this decision, but no successful >> language--indeed, no successful free software project of any sort--is a >> democracy. * Successful languages pay >> attention to what people want, but to change the language according to >> what most people want is, I believe, a recipe for chaos and >> incoherence. I believe that every successful language must have a >> coherent vision that is shared by a relatively small group of people. >> >> As I said, that is my opinion, but I think it's true. I would be >> interested to hear of a counter-example. >> > > I also believe that every successful free software project has a small set > of final deciders, but I don't think it's correct to say that thus, no > successful free software project is a democracy. Representative democracy > is still democracy - and indeed, any modern democracy I'm aware of, is a > representative one. And Debian is undeniably successful and very easily > defended to be a representative democracy. There is a limitation on voting > rights (only Debian Developers can vote), but it's akin to the limitation > of passports and the set of Debian Developers is hardly "small". > > This just as a specific counter because you asked for counter examples :) > Personally (opinion!), I tend to think that it rather supports your larger > point of democratic software development being a recipe for chaos and > incoherence - but YMMV of course. > > >> >> Since Go is a successful language, and hopes to remain successful, it >> too must be open to community input but must have a small number of >> people who make final decisions about how the language will change >> over time. >> >> So, I think that when the blog post says that Go is Google's language, >> what they mean is that Google makes those final decisions. >> >> Now a bit of personal history. The Go project was started, by Rob, >> Robert, and Ken, as a bottom-up project. I joined the project some 9 >> months later, on my own initiative, against my manager's preference. >> There was no mandate or suggestion from Google management or >> executives that Google should develop a programming language. For >> many years, including well after the open source release, I doubt any >> Google executives had more than a vague awareness of the existence of >> Go (I recall a time when Google's SVP of Engineering saw some of us in >> the cafeteria and congratulated us on a release; this was surprising >> since we hadn't released anything recently, and it soon came up that >> he thought we were working on the Dart language, not the Go language.) >> >> Since Go was developed by people who worked at Google, it is >> inevitable that the people who initially developed Go, who became the >> core Go team, were Google employees. And it happens that of that core >> Go team, while not all are actively working on Go, none have left >> Google for another company in the years since. >> >> I do think that due to Go's success there are now Google executives >> who know about Go. Google as a company is doing more work with Go at >> a higher level, supporting efforts like the Go Cloud Development Kit >> (https://github.com/google/go-cloud). And, of course, Go is a >> significant supporting element for major Google Cloud projects like >> Kubernetes. >> >> But (and here you'll just have to trust me) those executives, and >> upper management in general, have never made any attempt to affect how >> the Go language and tools and standard library are developed. Of >> course, there's no reason for them to. Go is doing fine, so why >> should they interfere? And what could they gain if they did >> interfere? So they leave us alone. >> >> In effect, then, the current state is what the blog post suggests at >> the very end: final decisions about the Go language are made by the >> core Go team, and the core Go team all work at Google, but there is no >> meaningful sense in which Google, apart from the core Go team, makes >> decisions about the language. >> >> I do think that it will be interesting to see what happens if someone >> on the core Go team decides to leave Google and but wants to continue >> working on Go. And it will be interesting to see what the core Go >> team, including me, decides to do about succession planning as time >> goes on. Being a core Go team member is a full time job, and many >> people who want to work on Go full time wind up being hired by Google, >> so it would not be particularly surprising if the core Go team >> continues to be primarily or exclusively Google employees. But even >> then it's not clear that Go will be Google's language in any deep >> sense. It's also possible that someday it will become appropriate to >> create some sort of separate Go Foundation to manage the language. I >> don't know. We'll have to see. >> >> As I said initially, none of this necessarily contradicts anything in >> the blog post, but perhaps it gives a slightly different perspective. >> >> In this note I've specifically focused on whether Go is Google's >> language. I have some thoughts on other aspects of the blog post, >> about its discussion of the interaction between the core Go team and >> the rest of the Go community, but this note is already too long. >> Perhaps I will tackle those later. Or perhaps not, no promises. >> >> Ian >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "golang-nuts" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-nuts/CAOyqgcXdDcUKCzOaSbaCq466cxeO1KzsxAxgasabJma2XPkkxw%40mail.gmail.com >> . >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the > Google Groups "golang-nuts" group. > To unsubscribe from this topic, visit > https://groups.google.com/d/topic/golang-nuts/6dKNSN0M_kg/unsubscribe. > To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to > golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-nuts/CAEkBMfFhOF0kiNsUfZkMc71SoJ8M5Y2Rqx1TnG9Yhc5aORMXBA%40mail.gmail.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-nuts/CAEkBMfFhOF0kiNsUfZkMc71SoJ8M5Y2Rqx1TnG9Yhc5aORMXBA%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-nuts/CADKwOTfkFT3RjCKUAoBy%2BO5%3D9nB865zXBveNn6PX9Zyw1boGag%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
