Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Community engagement for adoption of our fork #68

Closed
theckman opened this issue Jan 30, 2019 · 5 comments
Closed

Community engagement for adoption of our fork #68

theckman opened this issue Jan 30, 2019 · 5 comments
Labels
input wanted input wanted on the issue / PR

Comments

@theckman
Copy link
Member

This is an issue to gather input about doing an engagement of some larger projects who use github.com/satori/go.uuid to get them moved over to our repo. Should we wait until the Modules stuff shakes out/we cut the next major version?

The idea would be to open issues on the projects, at a minimum, to suggest they change. We could additionally then issue PRs, time permitting, to some of those projects to update them to point to us. All worth considering / discussing.

@gofrs/all thoughts?

@theckman theckman added the input wanted input wanted on the issue / PR label Jan 30, 2019
@dylan-bourque
Copy link
Member

dylan-bourque commented Jan 30, 2019 via email

@sagikazarmark
Copy link
Member

@andradei
Copy link

Go modules are not experimental anymore. That was the first thing I noticed when looking for a uuid package/module on go.dev

I know this doesn't have anything to do with the project's actual implementation, and in fact, if this project has moved forward and implemented more RFCs, it should have enough appeal to have users of the original repo switch.

Maybe you guys could open an issue on those repos asking for them to consider moving.

@zerkms
Copy link
Member

zerkms commented Mar 24, 2020

more RFCs

Like what?

@andradei
Copy link

Sorry, I just saw you guys implement the same RFCs. I thought this project implemented more, but in reality it improves upon the original repo.

To me that is reason enough to open an issue on projects that could move to using this fork.

@cameracker cameracker closed this as not planned Won't fix, can't repro, duplicate, stale May 12, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
input wanted input wanted on the issue / PR
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

6 participants