diff --git a/2015/how-go-was-made.slide b/2015/how-go-was-made.slide
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..7614f5d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/2015/how-go-was-made.slide
@@ -0,0 +1,603 @@
+How Go was made
+GopherCon Closing Keynote
+9 Jul 2015
+
+Andrew Gerrand
+adg@golang.org
+
+
+* This talk
+
+How was Go made?
+
+What was its development process?
+
+How has the process changed?
+
+What is its future?
+
+.image how-go-was-made/gopherswrench.jpg 300 _
+
+
+* The early days
+
+
+* Three friends
+
+Robert Griesemer, Rob Pike, and Ken Thompson's thought experiment:
+
+"What should a modern, practical programming language look like?"
+
+
+* The early process
+
+Design discussions by mail and in-person.
+
+Consensus-driven:
+A feature was accepted only when *all* the three authors agreed it necessary.
+
+Most proposed changes were rejected.
+
+
+* The initial spec
+
+The first artifact of Go was the language specification.
+
+The first commit (now git hash `18c5b48`) was a draft of that spec:
+
+	Author: Robert Griesemer <gri@golang.org>
+	Date:   Sun Mar 2 20:47:34 2008 -0800
+
+	    Go spec starting point.
+
+Go's entire history is preserved in the core reposistory.
+
+
+* The first Go program 
+
+The first Go program was a Prime Sieve, and was included in the spec.
+
+	func Filter(in *chan< int, out *chan> int, prime int) {
+	  for {
+	    i := <in;  // Receive value of new variable 'i' from 'in'.
+	    if i % prime != 0 {
+	      >out = i  // Send 'i' to channel 'out'.
+	    }
+	  }
+	}
+
+	func Sieve() {
+	  ch := new(chan int);  // Create a new channel.
+	  go Generate(ch);  // Start Generate() as a subprocess.
+	  for {
+	    prime := <ch;
+	    printf("%d\n",  prime);
+	    ch1 := new(chan int);
+	    go Filter(ch, ch1, prime);
+	    ch = ch1
+	  }
+	}
+
+
+* Version control
+
+Subversion was the project's first version control system. (no code review!)
+The trio made 400 commits to Subversion.
+
+The last Subversion commit (git hash `777ee7`, 21 July 2008) contained:
+
+- the spec,
+- a Go compiler (linux/darwin amd64),
+- a few packages (fmt, rand, and math),
+- some test programs.
+
+`test/helloworld.go`:
+
+	package main
+
+	func main() {
+		print "hello, world\n";
+	}
+
+
+* Getting serious
+ 
+In July 2008 the project migrated from Subversion to Perforce,
+to use Google's excellent code review system.
+
+The team grew:
+
+- Russ Cox joined in August 2008,
+- Ian Lance Taylor joined in September,
+- ~20 other Googlers got involved in their 20% time.
+
+
+* Early changes
+
+It was easy to make changes in those days.
+Everyone knew each other.
+There were ~0 users.
+All the source code in one place.
+
+Workflow informal, but design-oriented.
+
+
+* Waiting for good design (1/2)
+
+Many problems don't have obvious solutions.
+
+The team were prepared to wait until they found the correct design.
+
+For example:
+
+The `fmt` package was written long before `reflect`.
+Before then, `fmt` had an awkward chaining API:
+
+	fmt.New().s("i = ").d(i).putnl()
+
+Now: 
+
+	fmt.Println("i = ", i)
+
+
+* Waiting for good design (2/2)
+
+Another example:
+
+Slices took more than a year to figure out.
+Before then, there were "open arrays" but they were awkward.
+
+`src/lib/container/vector.go` @ `f4dcf51`:
+
+	// BUG: workaround for non-constant allocation.
+	// i must be a power of 10.
+	func Alloc(i int) *[]Element {
+		switch i {
+		case 1:
+			return new([1]Element);
+		case 10:
+			return new([10]Element);
+		case 100:
+			return new([100]Element);
+		case 1000:
+			return new([1000]Element);
+		}
+		print "bad size ", i, "\n";
+		panic "not known size\n";
+	}
+
+
+* An early language change
+
+`chan` and `map` were originally spelled `*chan` and `*map`.
+
+The team had a meeting to discuss removing the asterisks.
+
+Russ implemented the compiler change (`dc7b2e9`),
+and updated ~every Go file in existence (`08ca30b`).
+
+.code how-go-was-made/mapchan.diff
+
+This rapid approach works well at a small scale.
+
+
+* Toward open source
+
+In mid-2009 the team prepared for the open source release.
+
+Moved to their third version control system:
+Mercurial, with Rietveld for code review.
+# (We would go on to use these tools for five years.)
+
+The last Perforce commit (`9e96f25`, Oct 29) contained
+
+- a mature spec and compiler,
+- a broad standard library (82 packages),
+- gofmt, godoc, cgo,
+- the testing framework,
+- the FAQ, Effective Go, and more.
+
+
+* Open source
+
+
+* The release
+
+10 November 2009: Go was released. (`78c47c3`)
+
+.image how-go-was-made/website.png 500 _
+
+
+* The response
+
+There was a huge response to the release. The team was overwhelmed.
+
+People sent changes from day one. The first non-Googler change:
+
+	commit 022e3ae2659491e519d392e266acd86223a510f4
+	Author: Kevin Ballard <kevin@sb.org>
+	Date:   Tue Nov 10 20:04:14 2009 -0800
+
+	    Fix go-mode.el to work on empty buffers
+	    
+	    Fixes #8.
+	    
+	    R=agl, agl1, rsc
+	    https://golang.org/cl/153056
+
+In the first month, 32 people from outside Google contributed to Go.
+
+The contribution process worked.
+
+
+* Changes after the release
+
+The team continued to make big changes after the release.
+
+But the process was now different, as they now had a community.
+
+
+* The first major public change (1/2)
+
+On December 9th, Rob Pike sent the first public change proposal.
+
+He proposed to remove semicolons at line endings.
+[[https://golang.org/s/semicolon-proposal][golang.org/s/semicolon-proposal]]
+
+The proposal was a "design doc" that included:
+
+- background,
+- rationale,
+- a formal specification of the change,
+- an implementation plan, and
+- examples (including a copy of the Prime Sieve program without semicolons).
+
+
+* The first major public change (2/2)
+
+The design doc was shared with the community for feedback.
+
+"Please read the proposal and think about its consequences.
+We're pretty sure it makes the language nicer to use and sacrifices almost nothing in precision or safety."
+
+The response was positive.
+
+The proposal was implemented.
+
+Most of the changes were made mechanically (thanks `gofmt`)).
+
+This would be the shape of things to come.
+
+
+* Curating change
+
+* Curating change
+
+The team was careful to curate the changes that made it into the language.
+(Remember: "Wait for good design.")
+
+There were many proposed changes and additions to Go.
+
+As before, many more were declined than accepted.
+
+Some fit with the project's goals, others did not.
+
+An early accepted proposal:
+
+- Make the upper and lower bounds of slice operations optional. (`x[lo:]`, `x[:hi]`)
+
+And a declined proposal:
+
+- Allow negative indices in slice operations. (`x[-n]` `==` `x[len(x)-n]`)
+
+
+* Communicating goals
+
+At first, we did a poor job explaining the project's goals and development process.
+
+This caused frustration. ("Why don't they accept my suggestions?")
+
+It took us a while to articulate it:
+Rob Pike's [[http://talks.golang.org/2012/splash.article][talk]] in October 2012
+"Go at Google: Language Design in the Service of Software Engineering"
+was the first thorough explanation of Go's _raison_d'être_.
+
+I wish we'd had this document written in 2009.
+(But we couldn't have written it then.)
+
+Read it, if you haven't already.
+
+
+* A thought on openness
+
+What if Go has been open source from day one?
+
+It may have been easier for the public to understand the project.
+
+But it's not that simple:
+
+Ideas are fragile in their early stages; they need to be nurtured before exposed to the world.
+
+
+* Managing change
+
+* Weekly snapshots
+
+Attempt to keep everyone in sync.
+
+- Apply a Mercurial tag to a specific, stable revision.
+- Announce to user mailing list with detailed changelog.
+
+Great for early adopters and core developers.
+
+
+* Problems with weeklies
+
+Contributors work at tip; users sync to weeklies.
+
+Burden on users:
+
+- annoying to update weekly,
+- painful to update less often.
+
+Version skew results because users are at different weeklies.
+
+Skew fragments the community and slows adoption.
+
+
+* Formal release process
+
+March 2011: introduced releases every 1-2 months.
+
+- Pick the most stable of the past few snapshots and tag it.
+- Announce with abridged "must read" release notes.
+
+Keeps the community more in sync. Reduces churn.
+
+Popular with users.
+
+But skew still prevalent: adventurers and core devs still use weeklies (or tip!).
+
+
+* Introducing Gofix
+
+A tool to mechanically update code to accommodate language and library changes.
+
+  gofix prog.go
+
+Announced in May 2011.
+
+Eases the burden of staying current.
+Release notes now mostly say "run gofix."
+
+Not a sed script. Works on the AST.
+
+
+* A gofix example
+
+The `reflect` API was completely redesigned in 2011.
+Gofix made most of the changes:
+
+.image how-go-was-made/reflect1.png _ 1000
+.image how-go-was-made/reflect3.png _ 1000
+.image how-go-was-made/reflect2.png _ 1000
+
+
+* Versioning issues persist
+
+Gofix is no panacea.
+
+As the root of the dependency graph, a programming language can suffer acutely from version skew.
+
+The fundamental issue remains:
+Code you write today may not compile tomorrow.
+
+Some companies unwilling to bet on Go as they saw it as unstable.
+
+
+* A need for stability
+
+Gofix makes changes very easy, and also makes it easy to experiment.
+But it can't do everything.
+
+Priorities: If change is easy, what change is important?
+
+Wanted to make major changes to the language and libraries,
+but this requires planning.
+
+Decision: design and implement a stable version of Go, its libraries, and its tools.
+
+
+* Go 1
+
+* What is Go 1?
+
+A specification of the language and libraries that will be supported for years.
+
+Available as downloadable binary packages.
+
+An opportunity to:
+
+- fix minor language irritations,
+- fix inconsistencies in the standard library,
+- focus on bug fixing and cleaning up TODOs,
+- design and build a strong build tool set (get rid of make),
+- bring Windows support up to par.
+
+Polish and refine, not redesign.
+
+
+* Planning Go 1
+
+The team at Google prepared a detailed design document.
+
+Implemented (but did not commit) many of the proposed changes.
+
+Met for a week to discuss and refine the document (October 2011).
+
+Presented the document to the community for discussion.
+
+Community feedback essential in refining the document.
+
+.link http://blog.golang.org/preview-of-go-version-1
+
+
+* An example: errors (1/5)
+
+Before Go 1, there was no error type.
+Instead, the `os` package provided an `Error` type:
+
+	package os
+
+	type Error interface {
+		String() string
+	}
+
+References to `os.Error` were ubiquitous.
+
+	package io
+
+	type Reader interface {
+		Read(p []byte) (n int, err os.Error)
+	}
+	
+	type Closer interface {
+		Close() os.Error
+	}
+
+
+
+* An example: errors (2/5)
+
+Before the Go 1 meeting, Russ raised the issue in the design document:
+
+.image how-go-was-made/errors-issue.png 500 _
+
+
+* An example: errors (3/5)
+
+At the meeting the team discussed the issue,
+Russ presented data from his experiments with the change,
+and we made a tentative decision:
+
+.image how-go-was-made/errors-discussion.png 350 _ 
+
+
+* An example: errors (4/5)
+
+On the list, the community made some keen suggestions:
+
+.image how-go-was-made/errors-rog.png 500 _ 
+
+
+* An example: errors (5/5)
+
+Many of those suggestions were rolled into the Go 1 design document:
+
+.image how-go-was-made/errors-final.png 500 _
+
+
+* Implementing Go 1
+
+Create many new issues on the tracker.
+
+Contributors nominate themselves to address specific issues.
+
+Stop developing new features; prioritize stability.
+
+
+* The success of Go 1
+
+The Go 1 release in March 2012 heralded a new era for the project.
+
+Users appreciated the stability. Huge uptick in community growth.
+
+.image how-go-was-made/trends.png
+
+Contributors focused on implementation, tools, and ecosystem.
+
+
+* The release cycle
+
+The next release was Go 1.1, more than a year after Go 1.
+
+This is too long; switch to a 6-month release cycle.
+
+Stuck to this plan for 1.2, 1.3, and 1.4, and we're (almost) on track for 1.5.
+
+
+* The future of change
+
+
+* A question
+
+Go's development process emphasizes up-front design.
+
+The project has ~450 contributors and many committers from outside Google.
+
+But most change proposals
+(despite being driven by community feedback)
+were made by the Go team at Google.
+
+Why is this?
+
+
+* Contribution guidelines
+
+The Go contribution guidelines are thorough on the code review process.
+
+But on design, just this:
+
+"Before undertaking to write something new for the Go project, send mail to the mailing list to discuss what you plan to do."
+
+Does this decribe the project's approach to design? Only superficially.
+
+Successful proposals include design docs
+that discuss rationale, tradeoffs, and implementation.
+
+There is a gap in our documented process.
+
+
+* Go Change Proposal Process: a proposal
+
+Brad Fitzpatrick and I recently proposed a formal Change Proposal Process.
+
+Its goals:
+
+- Make the design process clear to new contributors.
+- Commit to timely evaluations of proposals.
+- Build a recorded history of proposals.
+
+
+* How does it work?
+
+The new change process, in brief:
+
+- File an issue.
+- The contributors triage the issue.
+- Write a design document (following a template).
+- The contributors review the document.
+- If the proposal is accepted, implement it.
+
+[[https://golang.org/s/proposal-process][golang.org/s/proposal-process]]
+
+
+* An experimental process
+
+The new process is an experiment.
+
+We're still discussing exactly how it should work.
+
+I hope it will make Go's design process more accessible to the community.
+
+
+* Conclusion
+
+Go's design-driven process has served us well.
+
+But as Go is more widely used,
+the community needs a larger role in shaping its future.
+
+With your help, we can make Go's next 5 years more spectacular than the last.
+
+.image how-go-was-made/5years.png 350 _ 
diff --git a/2015/how-go-was-made/5years.png b/2015/how-go-was-made/5years.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..df10648
--- /dev/null
+++ b/2015/how-go-was-made/5years.png
Binary files differ
diff --git a/2015/how-go-was-made/errors-discussion.png b/2015/how-go-was-made/errors-discussion.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..3ca8a5e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/2015/how-go-was-made/errors-discussion.png
Binary files differ
diff --git a/2015/how-go-was-made/errors-final.png b/2015/how-go-was-made/errors-final.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..78bad5b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/2015/how-go-was-made/errors-final.png
Binary files differ
diff --git a/2015/how-go-was-made/errors-issue.png b/2015/how-go-was-made/errors-issue.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..72a4225
--- /dev/null
+++ b/2015/how-go-was-made/errors-issue.png
Binary files differ
diff --git a/2015/how-go-was-made/errors-rog.png b/2015/how-go-was-made/errors-rog.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..0c121d8
--- /dev/null
+++ b/2015/how-go-was-made/errors-rog.png
Binary files differ
diff --git a/2015/how-go-was-made/gopherswrench.jpg b/2015/how-go-was-made/gopherswrench.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..93005f4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/2015/how-go-was-made/gopherswrench.jpg
Binary files differ
diff --git a/2015/how-go-was-made/mapchan.diff b/2015/how-go-was-made/mapchan.diff
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..ddd5cd0
--- /dev/null
+++ b/2015/how-go-was-made/mapchan.diff
@@ -0,0 +1,8 @@
+ type PollServer struct {
+-       cr, cw *chan *FD;       // buffered >= 1
++       cr, cw chan *FD;        // buffered >= 1
+        pr, pw *os.FD;
+-       pending *map[int64] *FD;
++       pending map[int64] *FD;
+        poll *Pollster; // low-level OS hooks
+ }
diff --git a/2015/how-go-was-made/reflect1.png b/2015/how-go-was-made/reflect1.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..3ab1299
--- /dev/null
+++ b/2015/how-go-was-made/reflect1.png
Binary files differ
diff --git a/2015/how-go-was-made/reflect2.png b/2015/how-go-was-made/reflect2.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..dcf8213
--- /dev/null
+++ b/2015/how-go-was-made/reflect2.png
Binary files differ
diff --git a/2015/how-go-was-made/reflect3.png b/2015/how-go-was-made/reflect3.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..a4361d6
--- /dev/null
+++ b/2015/how-go-was-made/reflect3.png
Binary files differ
diff --git a/2015/how-go-was-made/trends.png b/2015/how-go-was-made/trends.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..a5a26a1
--- /dev/null
+++ b/2015/how-go-was-made/trends.png
Binary files differ
diff --git a/2015/how-go-was-made/website.png b/2015/how-go-was-made/website.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6254020
--- /dev/null
+++ b/2015/how-go-was-made/website.png
Binary files differ