Yep. He is trying to stir up public opinion after his legal options petered out.
Admitting the status of his original shares is not a good look either way. Either he sold, and the additional shares aren't technically worth $1B because he'd have sold them too. Otherwise he held, and is another unsatisfied greedy billionaire in the world.
I think the migration can be made pretty easy for users with deprecation notices and the `go fix` tool. Better explained in [1] (I have not tried it myself).
The idea is: the package maintainer pushes a final version of the old package that is a shim, and which has a deprecation notice. The shim imports the new package, and forwards all calls to the new package (and I suppose type aliases and variable aliases as well). The shim includes `//go:fix inline` annotations on all exported symbols, so that when users run `go fix` it rewrites their code to use the new package, by inlining their usages of the old package (which is now simply a shim that references the new package).
Not perfect. There is still a bit of a discoverability problem. Not all tooling warns on deprecated packages/functions (go toolchain doesn't, but gopls and staticcheck do). And users need to know to run `go fix`.
This landing page is not good. It's mired in out-of-context jargon and implementation detail. (What does "virtualize the worktree" mean? Git already has "effectively free" branching. What does branching "mid-run" mean? How does a teammate "join while the work is happening"? What/where are they joining?).
What actually is it and what value do I get out of it?
Reading the linked blog posts: It's a layer on top of git for CRDT-based collaborative editing that captures addressable code deltas + agent conversations. I could have real-time collaborative humans + agents development and can resume any agent conversation from any point in history, because it is all stored (powered by DeltaDB). I guess?
I actually might want this, but wouldn't know it from the landing page.
Admitting the status of his original shares is not a good look either way. Either he sold, and the additional shares aren't technically worth $1B because he'd have sold them too. Otherwise he held, and is another unsatisfied greedy billionaire in the world.