[vultour]

This seems like a terrible misunderstanding of the errgroup package? The entire point of the returned context is that it's cancelled if an error occurs, yet the author never uses it again until after he's done with the errgroup. The behaviour is also clearly documented in the only function exported by the package.

[masklinn]

> The entire point of the returned context is that it's cancelled if an error occurs, yet the author never uses it again until after he's done with the errgroup.

`Wait()` also does that. And the examples in the package documentation don't show the context as a way for the caller to be notified that things are done (that's what `Wait()` is for) but as a way for the callees (the callbacks passed to Do) to early abort.

This is mostly confirmed by the discussion dantillberg linked above, where someone suggests passing the errgroup's context down to the callbacks as parameter and the package author replies they don't do that because the lack of inference makes for nasty boilerplate (https://github.com/golang/go/issues/34510#issuecomment-53961...).

[tonyhb]

Yeah, just... like, don't use ctx from WithContext after the errgroup. WithContext is an API that specifically and explicitly cancels the context on error. It's absolutely optional. It's not a bug at all. It's using the wrong APIs and using a variable out of intended scope.