This was done as a joke.<p>Go was released.<p>Someone else claimed he owns the name "Go" for a programming language. As a proof his github "go language" creation and commit date was shown. This wasn't fake, was real.<p>Google surely won't give up for this reason. Few days later google extended their go commit to 1972. Preceding that author's date by a long shot.<p>Guess you can find the news coverage from that time if you search.
So any thoughts on this company, Repography? Their dashboards look really cool, but the only way to give them a go with my own repositories is to authorize their Github app to "Act on my behalf", whatever that means, or to curl some unknown code and pipe that into bash locally on my machine. Neither option is one I'm particularly fond of trying, without additional assurances that this is a legit org.
I don't know. I just feel like they could have spent a bit more time convincing me it's safe to do that authorization thing. Likewise, I could have downloaded their script and audited it before running - I just don't have the time to do that right now.
This seems to be a joke, but I was expecting it might be serious, because (AIUI) the Go compiler is derived from the Plan 9 C compiler. Of course, that was probably not started in <i>1972</i>, but it does mean Go's source code is older than the language itself.
Russ cox wrote about it too: <a href="https://research.swtch.com/govcs" rel="nofollow">https://research.swtch.com/govcs</a>
See also <a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12371029" rel="nofollow">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12371029</a> (from 2016)
There seems to be a lot of confusion. Check out the GIT_AUTHOR_DATE (or git commit --date) and GIT_COMMITTER_DATE environment variables for more insight.