upspin VS golang-standards/project-layout

Super intriguing. Thanks for sharing!

It reminds me a bit of an early Go project called Upspin [1]. And also a bit of Solid [2]. Did you get any inspiration from them?

What excites me about your project is that you're addressing the elephant in the room when it comes to data sovereignty (~nobody wants to self-host a personal database but their personal devices aren't publicly accessible) in an elegant way.

By storing the data on my personal device and (presumably?) paying for a managed relay (and maybe an encrypted backup), I can keep my data in my physical possession, but I won't have to host anything on my own. Is that the idea?

https://upspin.io/

There are a few Go projects meant to be learned from:

- https://github.com/pion/opus for to learn audio

- https://github.com/benbjohnson/wtf for overall production quality

- https://github.com/upspin/upspin difficult to explain, personally I'm not a fan of the errors

You could also take a look at some real-world open-source projects. I like upspin for its idiomatic approach.

For example, Rob Pike's upspin places all its validations in the separate package. Do you agree with that approach? Which yet proven options there are?

Just a few projects that could perhaps interest you in terms of design of your own solution :

Upspin: https://upspin.io/

The early error wrapping work which emerged out of the Upspin project, that eventually made its way into the errors package, included stack traces in the wrap error. This would provide exactly what it appears you seek.

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.