4 ms·

Lot of people in this thread crapping on Microsoft, but that's not to say that there's not some valid criticism here. Microsoft is trying to unscrew the single

Lot of people in this thread crapping on Microsoft, but that's not to say that there's not some valid criticism here. Microsoft is trying to unscrew the single platform nature of dotnet. This is going to take some time. They are having to break bones to set them correctly. Let's not pretend that any of us devs have never inherited an old project that we had to fix, and left a wake of destruction. That said, shame on them for not listening to the community more. Many, many people on Github were very vocal about the project formats and the build system, and it was obvious that Microsoft made up it's mind. While I'm a huge fan of dotnet, I also have to chastise Microsoft here. You can't leap to open source and then crap on your contributors when they are telling you that you're making a blind decision. If it was the one contrarian person that always complains about everything, I could see it, but it wasn't. Very notable members in the dotnet ecosystem raised the warning flag on this. I for one kept with the mindset of not building anything for production with their v1 release. This is an old rule. By v2, I'm betting this thing will be awesome. Hell it already is. Let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater.

justin66 10y ago
> You can't leap to open source and then crap on your contributors when they are telling you that you're making a blind decision. Are any very large companies doing this better? (Not Google, certainly... Oracle? I kid...)
jsingleton 10y ago
Yes, it's always worth waiting until v2 (or at least the first service pack / patch) before using something in anger, but experimenting in non-critical areas is fine. This applies to almost all software, but particularly the core stuff like OS and DB. I believe this is why the first Oracle DB was "v2". I'm not sure many people were fooled by this trick.
sqeaky 10y ago
> Microsoft is trying to unscrew the single platform nature of dotnet. This is the largest effort and the longest without overt attempts at screwing people to be customers. I am going to hold out for some more time, I am not yet convinced Microsoft is acting in good faith yet, their history is so bad. Are they still suing companies for distributing android.
wvenable 10y ago
> That said, shame on them for not listening to the community more. Many, many people on Github were very vocal about the project formats and the build system, and it was obvious that Microsoft made up it's mind. It seems to me they have been listening the community but some of what the community wants just isn't feasible or feasible at this time. This update in particular demonstrates Microsoft is still trying to improve the experience for everyone.
WayneBro 10y ago
> Many, many people on Github were very vocal about the project formats and the build system... I have not been following the project. Can somebody fill me in on what the people on GitHub were very vocal about specifically? Did they want JSON instead of XML or vice versa? Or something else?
romanovcode 10y ago
Well, in my opinion they actually do need to have strong opinions because it's not "just another node framework". They want to target enterprise sooner than later and it doesn't hurt that you have huge megacorp backing the product, of course it also makes their saying much more weightful. Also, I don't see the problem with the changes, they announced that they are going away from JSON to XML like 3 months ago and it's not like this is news. Also, I like XML much better for project files because IMO it's much more readable.
- vmarsy 10y ago
  I like the XML format better too. It's also easier* to parse if you start using XPath, if for any reasons you need to quickly read/write some of the values. * Except when a default namespace is involved, then XPath expressions get more complicated. But according to that blog, it looks like the VS team ditched the default xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/developer/msbuild/2003" http://schemas.microsoft.com/developer/msbuild/2003" namespace in the <Project> root :)
nightski 10y ago
The entire point of this change was in response to community feedback... Now the ones who were not vocal in the past are coming out. The problem is, the only very vocal members on github or whatever are the ones who are unhappy. This turns it into a chasing ones tail scenario.

justin66 10y ago

> You can't leap to open source and then crap on your contributors when they are telling you that you're making a blind decision. Are any very large companies doing this better? (Not Google, certainly... Oracle? I kid...)

jsingleton 10y ago

Yes, it's always worth waiting until v2 (or at least the first service pack / patch) before using something in anger, but experimenting in non-critical areas is fine. This applies to almost all software, but particularly the core stuff like OS and DB. I believe this is why the first Oracle DB was "v2". I'm not sure many people were fooled by this trick.

sqeaky 10y ago

> Microsoft is trying to unscrew the single platform nature of dotnet. This is the largest effort and the longest without overt attempts at screwing people to be customers. I am going to hold out for some more time, I am not yet convinced Microsoft is acting in good faith yet, their history is so bad. Are they still suing companies for distributing android.

wvenable 10y ago

> That said, shame on them for not listening to the community more. Many, many people on Github were very vocal about the project formats and the build system, and it was obvious that Microsoft made up it's mind. It seems to me they have been listening the community but some of what the community wants just isn't feasible or feasible at this time. This update in particular demonstrates Microsoft is still trying to improve the experience for everyone.

WayneBro 10y ago

> Many, many people on Github were very vocal about the project formats and the build system... I have not been following the project. Can somebody fill me in on what the people on GitHub were very vocal about specifically? Did they want JSON instead of XML or vice versa? Or something else?

romanovcode 10y ago

Well, in my opinion they actually do need to have strong opinions because it's not "just another node framework". They want to target enterprise sooner than later and it doesn't hurt that you have huge megacorp backing the product, of course it also makes their saying much more weightful. Also, I don't see the problem with the changes, they announced that they are going away from JSON to XML like 3 months ago and it's not like this is news. Also, I like XML much better for project files because IMO it's much more readable.

vmarsy 10y ago
I like the XML format better too. It's also easier* to parse if you start using XPath, if for any reasons you need to quickly read/write some of the values. * Except when a default namespace is involved, then XPath expressions get more complicated. But according to that blog, it looks like the VS team ditched the default xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/developer/msbuild/2003" http://schemas.microsoft.com/developer/msbuild/2003" namespace in the <Project> root :)

nightski 10y ago

The entire point of this change was in response to community feedback... Now the ones who were not vocal in the past are coming out. The problem is, the only very vocal members on github or whatever are the ones who are unhappy. This turns it into a chasing ones tail scenario.