go-structure-examples VS golang-standards/project-layout

I have a question, I am trying out hexagonal architecture for one of my projects trying to follow this repository example and I ran into a slight problem.

Just fyi, that repo is NOT considered standard, and in fact, is often advised against. The structure of your code should depend on its complexity and how interoperable with other projects you need/would like it to be. I suggest watching this talk on structuring your code and taking a look at this companion repo to decide which will be the best way to structure your code, depending on your needs

Kat Zien's excellent talk, presentation and code samples can be found here.

Thanks for the video, I'll take a look at it. And I checked the repo, I liked how the new is structured: https://github.com/katzien/go-structure-examples/tree/master/new

So here’s where I normally tell people to start off: check out this video and this repo in regards to the main 6 ways of architecting your Go applications.

Watch this and give this repo a look.

Am I completely fumbling it by approaching this the wrong way & if so what should I do differently? I have searched a few repos like this which redefines the same entity in multiple places which I feel is a violation of some sort, and this which the author had to resort to moving some files outside to overcome a circular dependency (see comments inside their handling.go file).

Really surprised I haven’t seen katzien/go-structure-example and her GopherCon 2018 talk about structuring your Go projects mentioned yet

Let's agree to leave the MVC model for OO languages. A better architecture would be something like katzien/go-structure-examples

cmd: here where we will leave the main.go that starts our app.

> https://github.com/golang-standards/project-layout

The name of the repo is really and intentionally misleading. rsc filled an issue there to point this out, but the repo maintainer just disabled issues altogether so now no one can see it.

Even when it would not have such parasitic name, many seasoned Go programmers, me included, consider the self-proclaimed "Standard Go project Layout" as the opposite of what is good and advisable.

Unfortunately, the name just works, so it is being recommended all over the Internet since its inception.

Your comment makes it look as if you're saying you hate the Go development team, but it seems that isn't the case.

I get a little of what you're saying, I wouldn't say I hate anyone, but I strongly dislike how a lot of projects are organized. I think a lot stems from https://github.com/golang-standards/project-layout , which pretended to be standard and was so (ab)used one of the creators opened an issue about it. If you look at the actual Go src, it's much, much cleaner.

So you don't get blind sided for self proclaimed "standards" that are not

I am writing a project that has two components: a CLI and a library. I've organised the project as follows (as per organisation instructions):

Familiarity with the standard Golang project structure, which you can find here.

I've been learning how to build web applications using different frameworks and languages for a while now, such as Laravel with its MVC architecture and Node.js following the 'Hapi.js Way'. As I'm trying to create a new portfolio project using Go, I found myself contemplating over the ideal project structure. I wanted something that not only aligns with the standard Go project layout, but also makes the code both easy to write and understand. That's when I stumbled upon the concept of Hexagonal Architecture, as showcased in Netflix's engineering blog. The idea of seamlessly swapping infrastructures with minimal code changes fascinated me, and I decided to implement it in my new project.