| # Contributors Summit |
| 3 Aug 2017 |
| Tags: community |
| Summary: Reporting from the Go Contributor Summit at GopherCon 2017. |
| |
| Sam Whited |
| |
| ## Introduction |
| |
| The day before GopherCon, a group of Go team members and contributors gathered |
| in Denver to discuss and plan for the future of the Go project. |
| This was the first ever event of its kind, a major milestone for the Go project. |
| The event comprised a morning session revolving around focused discussions on a |
| theme, and an afternoon session made up of round table discussions in small |
| break-out groups. |
| |
| ### Compiler and runtime |
| |
| The compiler and runtime session started out with a discussion about refactoring |
| `gc` and related tools into importable packages. |
| This would reduce overhead in the core tools and in IDEs which could embed the |
| compiler themselves to do quick syntax checking. |
| Code could also be compiled entirely in memory, which is useful in environments |
| that don't provide a filesystem, or to run tests continually while you develop |
| to get a live report of breakages. |
| More discussion about whether or not to pursue this line of work will most |
| likely be brought up on the mailing lists in the future. |
| |
| There was also a great deal of discussion around bridging the gap between |
| optimized assembly code and Go. |
| Most crypto code in Go is written in assembly for performance reasons; this |
| makes it hard to debug, maintain, and read. |
| Furthermore, once you've ventured into writing assembly, you often can't call |
| back into Go, limiting code reuse. |
| A rewrite in Go would make maintenance easier. |
| Adding processor intrinsics and better support for 128-bit math would improve |
| Go's crypto performance. |
| It was proposed that the new `math/bits` package coming in 1.9 could be expanded |
| for this purpose. |
| |
| Not being all that familiar with the development of the compiler and runtime, |
| this for me was one of the more interesting sessions of the day. |
| I learned a lot about the current state of the world, the problems, and where |
| people want to go from here. |
| |
| ### Dependency management |
| |
| After a quick update from the [dep](https://github.com/golang/dep) team on the |
| status of the project, the dependency management session gravitated towards how |
| the Go world will work once dep (or something dep-like) becomes the primary |
| means of package management. |
| Work to make Go easier to get started with and make dep easier to use has |
| already started. |
| In Go 1.8, a default value for `GOPATH` was introduced, meaning users will only |
| have to add Go's bin directory to their `$PATH` before they can get started |
| with dep. |
| |
| Another future usability improvement that dep might enable, is allowing Go to |
| work from any directory (not just a workspace in the GOPATH), so that people can |
| use the directory structures and workflows they're used to using with other |
| languages. |
| It may also be possible to make `go install` easier in the future by guiding |
| users through the process of adding the bin directory to their path, or even |
| automating the process. |
| There are many good options for making the Go tooling easier to use, and |
| discussion will likely continue on the mailing lists. |
| |
| ### The standard library |
| |
| The discussions we had around the future of the Go language are mostly covered |
| in Russ Cox's blog post: [Toward Go 2](https://blog.golang.org//toward-go2), so |
| let's move on to the standard library session. |
| |
| As a contributor to the standard library and subrepos, this session was |
| particularly interesting to me. |
| What goes in the standard library and subrepos, and how much it can change, is a |
| topic that isn't well defined. |
| It can be hard on the Go team to maintain a huge number of packages when they |
| may or may not have anyone with specific expertise in the subject matter. |
| To make critical fixes to packages in the standard library, one must wait 6 |
| months for a new version of Go to ship (or a point release has to be shipped in |
| the case of security issues, which drains team resources). |
| Better dependency management may facilitate the migration of some packages out |
| of the standard library and into their own projects with their own release |
| schedules. |
| |
| There was also some discussion about things that are difficult to achieve with |
| the interfaces in the standard library. |
| For instance, it would be nice if `io.Reader` accepted a context so that |
| blocking read operations could be canceled. |
| |
| More [experience reports](https://golang.org/wiki/experiencereports) are |
| necessary before we can determine what will change in the standard library. |
| |
| ### Tooling and editors |
| |
| A language server for editors to use was a hot topic in the tooling session, |
| with a number of people advocating for IDE and tool developers to adopt a common |
| "Go Language Server" to index and display information about code and packages. |
| Microsoft's [Language Server Protocol](https://www.github.com/Microsoft/language-server-protocol) |
| was suggested as a good starting point because of its wide support in editors |
| and IDEs. |
| |
| Jaana Burcu Dogan also discussed her work on distributed tracing and how |
| information about runtime events could be made easier to acquire and attached to |
| traces. |
| Having a standard "counter" API to report statistics was proposed, but specific |
| experience reports from the community will be required before such an API can be |
| designed. |
| |
| ### The contributor experience |
| |
| The final session of the day was on the contributor experience. |
| The first discussion was all about how the current Gerrit workflow could be made |
| easier for new contributors which has already resulted in improvements to the |
| documentation for several repos, and influenced the new contributors workshop a |
| few days later! |
| |
| Making it easier to find tasks to work on, empowering users to perform gardening |
| tasks on the issue tracker, and making it easier to find reviewers were also |
| considered. |
| Hopefully we'll see improvements to these and many more areas of the |
| contribution process in the coming weeks and months! |
| |
| ### Breakout sessions |
| |
| In the afternoon, participants broke out into smaller groups to have more |
| in-depth discussions about some of the topics from the morning session. |
| These discussions had more specific goals. |
| For example, one group worked on identifying the useful parts of an experience |
| report and a list of existing literature documenting Go user experiences, |
| resulting in the experience report |
| [wiki page](https://golang.org/wiki/experiencereports). |
| |
| Another group considered the future of errors in Go. |
| Many Go users are initially confused by, or don't understand the fact that |
| `error` is an interface, and it can be difficult to attach more information to |
| errors without masking sentinel errors such as `io.EOF`. |
| The breakout session discussed specific ways it might be possible to fix some of |
| these issues in upcoming Go releases, but also ways error handling could be |
| improved in Go 2. |
| |
| ## Community |
| |
| Outside of the technical discussions, the summit also provided an opportunity |
| for a group of people from all over the world who often talk and work together |
| to meet in person, in many cases for the first time. |
| There is no substitute for a little face-to-face time to build a sense of mutual |
| respect and comradeship, which is critical when a diverse group with different |
| backgrounds and ideas needs to come together to work in a single community. |
| During the breaks, Go team members dispersed themselves among the contributors |
| for discussions both about Go and a little general socialization, which really |
| helped to put faces to the names that review our code every day. |
| |
| As Russ discussed in [Toward Go 2](https://blog.golang.org//toward-go2), |
| communicating effectively requires knowing your audience. |
| Having a broad sample of Go contributors in a room together helped us all to |
| understand the Go audience better and start many productive discussions about |
| the future of Go. |
| Going forward, we hope to do more frequent events like this to facilitate |
| discourse and a sense of community. |
| |
| .image contributors-summit/IMG_20170712_145844.jpg |
| .image contributors-summit/IMG_20170712_145854.jpg |
| .image contributors-summit/IMG_20170712_145905.jpg |
| .image contributors-summit/IMG_20170712_145911.jpg |
| .image contributors-summit/IMG_20170712_145950.jpg |
| |
| Photos by Steve Francia |