I think this would further encourage people to be lazy and not upgrade to newer Go versions.
This always leads to problems, especially when things like tooling is involved, and especially when the debugger side of Go improved so much between versions. I always liked the fact that Go only shows the docs for the current version, forcing everyone else to either upgrade or run their own godoc locally for their Go version. As such, I think it would be a mistake to support anything else but the current version (and tip, ofc). On Friday, January 19, 2018 at 6:07:49 PM UTC, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 9:49 AM, derek <den...@gmail.com <javascript:>> > wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 7:39 PM, Ian Lance Taylor <ia...@golang.org > <javascript:>> wrote: > >>> Like for Nodejs, and Python and many other language has permanent > >>> archived docs for olders versions: > >>> > >>> https://nodejs.org/docs/v8.4.0/api/http2.html is permanent URL for > >>> nodejs v8.4.0 > >>> > >>> https://nodejs.org/api/http2.html is always pointing to latest > version > >> > >> We don't have that. You can build it yourself easily enough: clone > >> the git repo, check out 1.6 and run godoc with the -goroot option > >> pointing at that directory. > > > > I know how to set up a godoc site locally, but the problem then is not > > Google searchable... harder to share via a single link about a > > historic library function design... > > So I prefer if anyone knows a 3rd party godoc service online for a > > longer period? > > > > And question to the ones behind the official golang.org/doc/.. , Is > > there a reason intentionally not doing so? for the archived docs for > > older versions? > > It's unbelievable not providing any information online about historic > > versions, all because relatively young age? > > > > I know the Go designer's goal for 1.x at least is to be backward > > compatible for all historic versions down to 1.0? > > So when every newer 1.x version release, it's kind of calling everyone > > to upgrade, > > But if suppose there's a Go 1.x version market share research, I don't > > believe the current latest 1.9 has taken all 100% of share? The Go1.8 > > may still have 20% and Go1.6 10% ? > > > > I don't have the exact numbers, but The archived docs for an older > > version still must have some value; > > > > In the longer future, when Go 2 released, it can't take 100% market > > share at day1, right? it might take some years to convince every Go > > user to upgrade, Would you have an archived godoc for the last 1.x ? > > Perhaps. It's certainly worth considering. > > Maintaining online docs for older Go versions sounds like a fine idea > to me. It also sounds like work that somebody has to do. > > > > To any 3rd party Go related site owners, would you like to setup such > > archives service? > > Sounds like a good approach. Or I'm also open to someone writing the > necessary code for golang.org. > > Ian > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
