3 ms·

I don't think this is a fair assessment. This post is about two plugins (`LiveShare` and `Remote`), both by Microsoft, not being open source. None of these plu

I don't think this is a fair assessment. This post is about two plugins (`LiveShare` and `Remote`), both by Microsoft, not being open source. None of these plugins are even mentioned on Microsoft's Visual Studio Code homepage [0]. At least LiveShare is marketed as a separate tool for which a Visual Studio Code plugin exists (as well as a Visual Studio plugin). [0] https://code.visualstudio.com/ https://code.visualstudio.com/ [1] https://visualstudio.microsoft.com/de/services/live-share/ https://visualstudio.microsoft.com/de/services/live-share/

lozenge 6y ago
Microsoft's Python support just went closed source(pylance vs python language server) the closed sourceness is creeping in on multiple sides. IntelliCode is another closed source aspect.
- acdha 6y ago
  More precisely, the Python extension is open source but the Pylance language server is not: https://github.com/Microsoft/vscode-python https://github.com/Microsoft/vscode-python https://github.com/microsoft/pylance-release https://github.com/microsoft/pylance-release
  - WorldMaker 6y ago
    Pylance is built upon the Pyright language server which is open source: https://github.com/microsoft/pyright https://github.com/microsoft/pyright I'm curious what research/IP has lead to this being a source turducken of open-closed-open, but it's not entirely closed.
    - acdha 6y ago
      Has anyone said definitively that it wouldn't be open-source in the future? I know sometimes this is due to things like joint or contract development where the lawyers need to hash out the rights first.
      - WorldMaker 6y ago
        No plans according to a comment in July [1]. Curiosity leading me to try to answer my own question with an educated guess: Pylance does appear to use the ONNX runtime, so it seems probable that it could be using ML models for type information to feed to Pyright developed by or in concert with IntelliCode efforts and that research effort of IntelliCode does fit what Microsoft is currently keeping proprietary. [1] https://github.com/microsoft/pylance-release/issues/4#issuecomment-652555104 https://github.com/microsoft/pylance-release/issues/4#issuec...
        acdha 6y ago
        Interesting, thanks for the link - that definitely sounds like they’re trying something like using the free version as training for a paid product.
    - lozenge 6y ago
      They are saying in that README that pyright as a VS Code Extension will be left to rot, leaving just the typechecker as open source and maintained.
lawik 6y ago
I tried to be fair but I can't necessarily strike the balance you'd like :) I am disappointed because I expected more openness from the new direction of Microsoft than this indicates. In most of the places I've heard of LiveShare and Remote it is discussed in the context of the larger open source efforts of Microsoft. And it really isn't part of that. Specifically on things like open source-focused podcasts and such. That's how I've come across it. I think the distinction of what parts are proprietary and what parts are open will pass most developers by while they happily think they are working with open source tools. This is indeed about two plugins not being open source, as well as the marketplace for extensions which is dominated by open source work also being limited to Visual Studio-products only. I find this disappointing and it makes me more skeptical than I was previously. I think Microsoft can afford and would benefit from going further in an open direction with this. Its fine to not believe the same.

lozenge 6y ago

Microsoft's Python support just went closed source(pylance vs python language server) the closed sourceness is creeping in on multiple sides. IntelliCode is another closed source aspect.

acdha 6y ago
More precisely, the Python extension is open source but the Pylance language server is not: https://github.com/Microsoft/vscode-python https://github.com/Microsoft/vscode-python https://github.com/microsoft/pylance-release https://github.com/microsoft/pylance-release
- WorldMaker 6y ago
  Pylance is built upon the Pyright language server which is open source: https://github.com/microsoft/pyright https://github.com/microsoft/pyright I'm curious what research/IP has lead to this being a source turducken of open-closed-open, but it's not entirely closed.
  - acdha 6y ago
    Has anyone said definitively that it wouldn't be open-source in the future? I know sometimes this is due to things like joint or contract development where the lawyers need to hash out the rights first.
    - WorldMaker 6y ago
      No plans according to a comment in July [1]. Curiosity leading me to try to answer my own question with an educated guess: Pylance does appear to use the ONNX runtime, so it seems probable that it could be using ML models for type information to feed to Pyright developed by or in concert with IntelliCode efforts and that research effort of IntelliCode does fit what Microsoft is currently keeping proprietary. [1] https://github.com/microsoft/pylance-release/issues/4#issuecomment-652555104 https://github.com/microsoft/pylance-release/issues/4#issuec...
      - acdha 6y ago
        Interesting, thanks for the link - that definitely sounds like they’re trying something like using the free version as training for a paid product.
  - lozenge 6y ago
    They are saying in that README that pyright as a VS Code Extension will be left to rot, leaving just the typechecker as open source and maintained.

lawik 6y ago

I tried to be fair but I can't necessarily strike the balance you'd like :) I am disappointed because I expected more openness from the new direction of Microsoft than this indicates. In most of the places I've heard of LiveShare and Remote it is discussed in the context of the larger open source efforts of Microsoft. And it really isn't part of that. Specifically on things like open source-focused podcasts and such. That's how I've come across it. I think the distinction of what parts are proprietary and what parts are open will pass most developers by while they happily think they are working with open source tools. This is indeed about two plugins not being open source, as well as the marketplace for extensions which is dominated by open source work also being limited to Visual Studio-products only. I find this disappointing and it makes me more skeptical than I was previously. I think Microsoft can afford and would benefit from going further in an open direction with this. Its fine to not believe the same.