Hacker News Reader

Comment by laumars | Hacker News Reader

‘go get’ is older than ‘pip’. The way Go packages are versioned and referenced has evolved massively since then. I get the need for backwards compatibility, I really do, but if you can’t modernise 11 year old tech then I think you’re on the road to much bigger problems.

Edit: correction, Pip is older than Go. But for those downvoting me, the dates were just an illustration and don’t really matter to the point I’m making. That point being: after 11 years it should be safe to update a legacy interface.

View on HN

According to [1], version 0.2 of pip was released 2008-10-29. The 1.0 release which added Python 3 support was 2011-04-04 (which is what Wikipedia lists).

The earliest release I can find for Go at [2] is 2009-12-09, with 1.0 being released 2012-03-28.

[1] https://pypi.org/project/pip/#history

[2] https://golang.org/doc/devel/weekly

pip is older than go lol

Nope

> Initial release: 4 April 2011 (10 years ago)

Source: Wikipedia, pip (package manager).

It was a rebranding of the 2008 pyinstall as the same Wikipedia article states in the first section.

Like other things in Go, the antiquated feel is actually the pursuit of retro more than the product of age.

> It was a rebranding of the 2008 pyinstall as the same Wikipedia article states in the first section.

Fair point. I’m on my phone so missed that section when scrolling through for the summary box.

> Like other things in Go, the antiquated feel is actually the pursuit of retro more than the product of age.

I’m really not sure the point you’re trying to make here but it feels like a baseless cheap shot rather than a constructive comment

wikipedia is wrong

https://pypi.org/project/pip/0.2/

Released: Oct 28, 2008

The new behavior could easily have been `go mod get`. There are many ways to design things to not break people. When it comes to the tools, the Go team isn't concerned with breaking people. Their docs even note that.

You’re missing the point because ‘go mod get’ would cause the same deprecation notice. The complaint isn’t what the new command looks like, it’s that the old one is being deprecated.

What's the relevance of it being older than `pip`?

It’s just an illustration to help conceptualise the point. Like when people talk about larger distances using comparisons like “lengths of a football field”. The purpose was just demonstrating that the tooling in question is as old as many of the other common tooling used in other languages, rather than some recent thing that’s prone to frequent changes.

Why is this being downvoted? It was literally just answering the asked question!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com