[quectophoton]

But still there's programs like Git as an existing example of this kind of "ask the user" thing. Last time I checked:

* When you run `git init` without having configured default branch name it warns you with a big wall of text.

* When you run `git commit` without having configured a user, it warns you with a big wall of text.

* When you run `git pull` without having configured the strategy, it warns you with a big wall of text.

As much as I want to give them the benefit of doubt, this really comes off as wanting to silently enable it by default, because they know that if they actually ask in a similar way that `git` does, the answer will be "no".

[dewey]

As much as I like and appreciate git, it's hardly a good example for something with great UX.

[quectophoton]

Exactly, it's an example of a CLI that already messed up its interface, and has actually changed commands (checkout -> switch, has added flags for submodules, etc), and overall has improved since past versions, and still tries to improve.

And AFAIK it didn't add telemetry to send used commands to any server, even if that would have been by far the easiest way, given 90% of devs use it and complain about how bad it is.

It's an arbitrary percentage, but it gets the point across. The amount of devs using git is probably at least an order or magnitude higher than those using Go.

Go, on the other hand, already has decent-ish tooling (at least better Git), but it wants to add opt-out telemetry anyway.