Well, I guess we diverge in our views (besides affection for Go) in that I see the adoption of Go for Docker (init release 2013) & K8S (2015) as merit based choices. Go was made public in 2009.
> Programming languages are products, and get used because of the eco-systems they carry along, bullet point features are usually secondary to that.
K8S was initially developed in Java, the decision to switch to Go came later and they are still fighting the language, including having to maintain their own generics workaround.
It's absolutely relevant to the point that "we wouldn't keep using it if it wasn't an effective language" (modulo any disagreements about what "effective" means!). Many languages are heavily used due to network effects (popularity, marketing, community) and platform effects, not solely on technical merit. JavaScript and C come immediately to mind as examples of the platform effect on language selection. (The fact that modern JS transpilers exist merely papers over JS' dominant footing in the Web space.)
I maintain that it is a non-sequitur, if not patronizing, to state the obvious facts about software language eco-systems. My perception remains that Go sufficiently delighted a critical mass of developers who then proceeded to create the said eco-system. Mere marketing can not engender a vibrant community.
Please see my first post in this thread. As mentioned, I do agree that sans Rob Pike, Ken Thompson, and the Google host, the language would have likely languished in semi-obscurity. But if it was an entirely flea ridden dog, no amount of marketing would have afforded it the mind share that it possesses.
For example, even though I am not a big fan of Go, I have to use it when customers required us to deal with Docker or K8S.
Just like I have my issues with C, but would certainly use it when writing an UNIX driver.
Programming languages are products, and get used because of the eco-systems they carry along, bullet point features are usually secondary to that.