Is it possible Google donate golang project to a open source foundations or fund a foundations ?

[zixu mo]

Is it possible Google donate golang project to a open source foundations or fund a foundation ?

Go lang growing fast, so many and many users in the world now days.

But the google controlled the whole golang project.

It's not good and well for an open source project.

Now we have many more programming language in the world.

Many language has it's own foundations.

But Go lang is a Google company private open source project.

As a company, may be Go lang project will be cut , or abandon.

Google pay salaries for main developers (employed by Google ) who working on it. 

If google abandon this project, the develop team will be dismissed.

Can you imagine if Google do like this.

Golang can be survive if that happened?

[ptolomy23]

Itis great that Google funds Go development, but Go would continue to exist if they didn't.

It is open source, licensed reasonably, and the devs seem to care personally and probably wouldn't

drop it cold if Google stopped using it.

However, there are many non-Google people using Go (https://code.google.com/p/go-wiki/wiki/GoUsers), some relying on it for

core business. It would be annoying, but even if Google stopped all support others would step up and handle managing the project.

Google's people are doing a good job now, so I'm happy to have them continue until someone else is needed.

This comes up regularly; maybe a page on Go wiki would help avoid worry.

--
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...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Dave Cheney]

A private open source project is an oxymoron.

Go is not a private project, it is an open source project.

We benefit greatly from the generous sponsorship of google who pay many talented developers to work on the language full time, but that does not change the fact as written in the previous sentence.

[Ian Lance Taylor]

On Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 8:14 PM, zixu mo <hufen...@gmail.com> wrote:
>

> Is it possible Google donate golang project to a open source foundations or
> fund a foundation ?

What would change?

> Many language has it's own foundations.

Really? Python does, I suppose. But what about C? C++? Java?
Javascript? C#? Objective C? PHP?

> But Go lang is a Google company private open source project.

No. It's an open source project, many of whose committers (though not
all) work for Google.

Ian

[Russel Winder]

On Fri, 2014-12-19 at 22:55 -0800, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 8:14 PM, zixu mo <hufen...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Is it possible Google donate golang project to a open source
> > foundations or
> > fund a foundation ?
>
> What would change?

The legal framework of ownership of the intellectual property, and the
decision making structure.

Pragmatically, this is not a "big deal" for Go at present, but it
could be. Other "open source" languages have had to deal with these
issues, so it is not a unique situation.

> > Many language has it's own foundations.
>
> Really? Python does, I suppose. But what about C? C++? Java?
> Javascript? C#? Objective C? PHP?

C, C++, JavaScript are basically owned by ISO since they are defined
by an ISO standard. C# is really still owned by Microsoft as is F#,
Visual Basic,…. No idea about PHP. Java is weird since some trademarks
are owned by Oracle, but the language and definition of the JVM are
owned by the JCP which is not a wholly owned subsidiary of Oracle.

> > But Go lang is a Google company private open source project.
>
> No. It's an open source project, many of whose committers (though
> not all) work for Google.

But there is a question of who owns the intellectual property that is
the Go language definition and the two current implementations. Is
there a contribution agreement that must be signed by all people whose
changesets become part of the system. Would a fork of the current Go
system be encumbered?

Currently there is no big deal for Go users as long as they accept
that the current Go core team act as "benevolent dictators". As we
have seen fairly regularly, the core team do dictate most strongly.
However as the Go language has retained a consistent and good model
and tooling, this has not really been a problem for people making use
of the language.

The law is there though to deal with conflict; no conflict, no need
for law. For now, apart from "generics", there are no obvious
conflicts that matter, people have just got on using Go as it is
provided by the core (dictatorial :-) team.

Python is not the only language that chose to go for a foundation, it
is perhaps though the most well known. It's history is totally
different to that of Go, and so there are no direct analogies there.
There are at least two languages currently having this whole "shall we
have a foundation" debate exactly because of official corporate
control of open source languages. So the original question is a good
one, it does apply to Go, it is just that the need is not now because
the status quo isn't a problem. Let us hope it does not become a
problem.

--
Russel.
=============================================================================
Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200 voip: sip:russel...@ekiga.net
41 Buckmaster Road m: +44 7770 465 077 xmpp: rus...@winder.org.uk
London SW11 1EN, UK w: www.russel.org.uk skype: russel_winder

[Zizon Qiu]

On Sat, Dec 20, 2014 at 4:58 PM, Russel Winder <rus...@winder.org.uk> wrote:

On Fri, 2014-12-19 at 22:55 -0800, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 8:14 PM, zixu mo <hufen...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Is it possible Google donate golang project to a open source
> > foundations or
> > fund a foundation ?
>
> What would change?

The legal framework of ownership of the intellectual property, and the
decision making structure.

Pragmatically, this is not a "big deal" for Go at present, but it
could be. Other "open source" languages have had to deal with these
issues, so it is not a unique situation.

said, Node.js and io.js.

​

 

[Ian Lance Taylor]

On Sat, Dec 20, 2014 at 12:58 AM, Russel Winder <rus...@winder.org.uk> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2014-12-19 at 22:55 -0800, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>> On Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 8:14 PM, zixu mo <hufen...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Is it possible Google donate golang project to a open source
>> > foundations or
>> > fund a foundation ?
>>
>> What would change?
>
> The legal framework of ownership of the intellectual property, and the
> decision making structure.

The Go code is already owned by the "The Go Authors", namely the >400
people and entities listed in the AUTHORS file. That would not
change.

Decisions about the language would continue to be made by the core
committers. That would not change.

>> > Many language has it's own foundations.
>>
>> Really? Python does, I suppose. But what about C? C++? Java?
>> Javascript? C#? Objective C? PHP?
>
> C, C++, JavaScript are basically owned by ISO since they are defined
> by an ISO standard.

In Go terms, for those languages ISO only manages the language
specification, plus a description of the contents of the standard
library. That is a fairly small part of what the current Go team
does. We could start a standardization process for Go without
creating any sort of foundation. We're not going to start a
standardization process any time soon because there is no benefit to
doing so, but it seems orthogonal to any discussion of a Go
foundation.

> C# is really still owned by Microsoft as is F#,
> Visual Basic,…. No idea about PHP. Java is weird since some trademarks
> are owned by Oracle, but the language and definition of the JVM are
> owned by the JCP which is not a wholly owned subsidiary of Oracle.

Right--these languages are all very successful, much more successful
than Go to date, and none of them have a foundation.

>> > But Go lang is a Google company private open source project.
>>
>> No. It's an open source project, many of whose committers (though
>> not all) work for Google.
>
> But there is a question of who owns the intellectual property that is
> the Go language definition and the two current implementations.

There is no question. It's stated in every file in the standard Go
distribution.

> Is
> there a contribution agreement that must be signed by all people whose
> changesets become part of the system.

Yes, there is, as described in http://golang.org/doc/contribute.html .

> Would a fork of the current Go
> system be encumbered?

The LICENSE file in the distribution clearly spells out the (minimal)
requirements. The PATENTS file is also relevant.

> Python is not the only language that chose to go for a foundation, it
> is perhaps though the most well known. It's history is totally
> different to that of Go, and so there are no direct analogies there.
> There are at least two languages currently having this whole "shall we
> have a foundation" debate exactly because of official corporate
> control of open source languages. So the original question is a good
> one, it does apply to Go, it is just that the need is not now because
> the status quo isn't a problem. Let us hope it does not become a
> problem.

The question may be a good one but I still have not heard anything
that would actually change if we, or somebody else, created a Go
foundation.

Ian

[Brendan Tracey]

>> > Many language has it's own foundations.
>>
>> Really?  Python does, I suppose.  But what about C?  C++?  Java?
>> Javascript?  C#?  Objective C?  PHP?
>
> C, C++, JavaScript are basically owned by ISO since they are defined
> by an ISO standard.

In Go terms, for those languages ISO only manages the language
specification, plus a description of the contents of the standard
library.  That is a fairly small part of what the current Go team
does.  We could start a standardization process for Go without
creating any sort of foundation.  We're not going to start a
standardization process any time soon because there is no benefit to
doing so, but it seems orthogonal to any discussion of a Go
foundation.

Sorry for the ignorant question, but what would a "standardization process" do for go? Isn't Go already standardized as defined by the spec?

[Ian Lance Taylor]

Yes, exactly. There would be no benefit.

Ian

[David Symonds]

On 21 December 2014 at 07:49, Ian Lance Taylor <ia...@golang.org> wrote:

> Yes, exactly. There would be no benefit.

Not true. I'm sure a standardisation body could add a few more humps
to the camel.

[zixu mo]

Hope go lang will not be another Node.js

Behind Golang, it is google.

Like joyent behind node.js

There is no open source foundations who can control and take care about the language or  platform.

Revenue is the first things the companys care about.

If google not want to continue pay money or resource on golang.

The core develop team will be dismissed.

No single person can invent a programming language like go lang and other popular language.

Produce the success programming language need large amount human resources, money, and other support.

If there not be a stable foundation behind. 

The life of the project will not so long.

Hope golang will not go to the end.

But who can prove google will continue on it.

Google already cut most projects, or abandon them.

I like google reader before google terminated it.

Any thing google can not do it?

zixu mo於 2014年12月20日星期六UTC+8下午12時14分50秒寫道：

[Ian Lance Taylor]

On Sat, Dec 20, 2014 at 8:23 PM, zixu mo <hufen...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> If google not want to continue pay money or resource on golang.
>
> The core develop team will be dismissed.
>
> No single person can invent a programming language like go lang and other
> popular language.
>
> Produce the success programming language need large amount human resources,
> money, and other support.

Not really, not on the scale at which Google operates. Team member
salaries, and gophers, and T-shirts. That's about it. I haven't
tried to add everything up but I'm pretty sure it's less money than
Google puts into Summer of Code every year.

Google has millions of lines of code written in Go, so Google benefits
from Go. It's not just cost.

> If there not be a stable foundation behind.
>
> The life of the project will not so long.

This is a problem to be addressed in the unlikely event that the
situation arises. Google has always given at least several months
notice before shutting down any project. I see no benefit to
addressing it earlier.

Ian

[adam]

Google dictates this project and if it couldn't they wouldn't be contributing.- the moment it can't, it will pull support and hired help. It is what it is, take it for what its worth.

[zixu mo]

I am not care google put money on Sumer Code or Android project.

That's not prove google will take golang care for long time.

As you say . google got benefit from go.

But google as a strong tech company, it can invent golang, why not invent more like golang, just as dart lang? Golang++ or what ever.

Yes, google will put an announce on their blog or web page.

we have serval months to  accept the truth.

But dudes. Golang as a programming language, we should take more care about it.

If google said: the golang team will dismissed in next month. the employees will join the other team.

How could we do?

we can found a organization to handle the golang development  in a short times? 

Not funny.

Why not we thinking it now, do not waiting for the day comes.

zixu mo於 2014年12月20日星期六UTC+8下午12時14分50秒寫道：

[zixu mo]

Yesterday, Apache release theirs new code of conduct.

I quote one piece of the words

http://www.apache.org/foundation/policies/conduct.html
4. Be inquisitive. Nobody knows everything! Asking questions early avoids many problems later, so questions are encouraged, though they may be directed to the appropriate forum. Those who are asked should be responsive and helpful, within the context of our shared goal of improving Apache project code.

zixu mo於 2014年12月20日星期六UTC+8下午12時14分50秒寫道：

[Jason Gade]

I guess I don't understand the question.

The language is open-source and has been released to the wild. At that point it succeeds or fails on its own merits. In the unlikely event that Google suddenly stops supporting Go, then at that point some other interested group would probably take it over.

cf Free Pascal and Lazarus.

[zixu mo]

http://www.apache.org/foundation/

Apache is the one of the honor open source project.

Leading many open source projects development.

It's good and open.

Golang really need a organization behind. not only google.

zixu mo於 2014年12月20日星期六UTC+8下午12時14分50秒寫道：

[Ian Lance Taylor]

On Sat, Dec 20, 2014 at 9:39 PM, zixu mo <hufen...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> http://www.apache.org/foundation/
> Apache is the one of the honor open source project.
> Leading many open source projects development.
> It's good and open.
> Golang really need a organization behind. not only google.

You've made two different arguments.

The first is that if Google decides to stop supporting Go, there
should be some organization that continues to support it. You've
suggested that this should be a foundation. My response is 1) there
will be time to think about that in the unlikely event that the
situation arises; 2) there are many successful languages with no
associated foundation, and there are also many successful open source
projects with no associated foundation.

The second argument you've made above, that Go (by the way, it's Go,
not Golang) needs an organization behind it, not just Google. My
response is: why? How would that help? What would change?

Ian

[Henrik Johansson]

It would not change anything of course. Had it been another company backing Go I might be inclined to agree (Java is fairly hard in Oracle control regardless of the surrounding organizations) that a foundation or some such may be better. Had I been using say Swift for example... I have no illusions whatsoever about Google's financial motivations but given its fairly outstanding track record in the open source area I am easily willing to give the current setup the benefit of the doubt.

Either way, if the shit hits the fan alternate setups can always be put in place like you said.

[clasoke xoiermx]

Ten years leave。  Let's see :  We're forking Flutter. This is why.  

After google freeze Flutter team head count,

    

    A labor shortage can always be fixed through hiring. However, due to company-wide issues at Google, the Flutter team's head count was frozen circa 2023, and then earlier in 2024 we learned of a small number of layoffs. It seems that the team may now be expanding again, through outsourcing, but we're not likely to see the Flutter team double or quadruple its size any time soon.

To make matters worse, Google's corporate re-focus on AI caused the Flutter team to de-prioritize all desktop platforms. As we speak, the Flutter team is in maintenance mode for 3 of its 6 supported platforms. Desktop is quite possibly the greatest untapped value for Flutter, but it's now mostly stagnant.

The golang team has the same problem, If google continue freeze head count, or cut the job.

let's see what will happen. 

Time will told you what will be.