Russ Cox’s response to “Go Is Not a Community Driven Project”
His comments are fine, but don&#x27;t engage with any of the criticism or concrete points others have made.  The &quot;Go Is Not a Community Driven Project&quot; post really dug into detail how, in a specific case, Go did not behave as a community driven project, and it was made very clear that Go was Google&#x27;s language, not the communities.<p>Responding with, in essence, &quot;but we love the community!&quot; is great, and probably true, but...unless it&#x27;s followed up by &quot;...and that&#x27;s why we feel so badly about the previous events, and have made these specific changes&quot; (or at the minimum a rebuttal of the specific criticisms), it doesn&#x27;t really....mean anything?<p>Keep in mind, the closest we&#x27;ve got to introspection from Cox about the modules issue was a &quot;I&#x27;m sorry everyone else is upset, I must have not explained things well enough&quot; non-apology. Which is fine! The Go team doesn&#x27;t need to apologise for running their language development process however they see fit...but it does underscore the issue.<p>Fundamentally, a decent chunk of the Go community thinks that the modules process was <i>fundamentally broken</i>, and the Go team thinks the modules process was <i>fundamentally fine</i>. I would interpret the subtext of Cox&#x27;s post as &quot;we really wish the community would be fine with the process&quot;.  No doubt.<p>Finally, there&#x27;s something a bit patronising about this:<p>&gt; I spent a while trying to work out what I want to say about the general theme of Go and open source, but in the end I realized that my talk at Gophercon 2015 is a better articulation of what open source means for Go, and what Google&#x27;s role is, than any email I can write in a few hours today. You can read the blog post version, “Go, Open Source, Community,” at <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;blog.golang.org&#x2F;open-source" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;blog.golang.org&#x2F;open-source</a>, and I am including a copy below. I reread it this morning, and I still believe everything I said then.<p>The current discussion is about events <i>after</i> 2015, by people who are well aware of that talk. If people are questioning how the Go team is interacting with the community even <i>after</i> that talk, then maybe it isn&#x27;t sufficient, and you need to do more than just tell everyone to read it again?