8 ms·

Pretty encouraging sign given the drama the last few days. In addition to the community response, it’s pretty clear that a number of dotnet and MSFT team member

Pretty encouraging sign given the drama the last few days. In addition to the community response, it’s pretty clear that a number of dotnet and MSFT team members went to bat hard for this. Really happy to see that they won out.

capableweb 5y ago
Encouraging? Microsoft demonstrated here that the move wasn't because of quality or that the change was unable to be in the OSS version, they demonstrated that they only act a certain way because of the backlash. If they would have stand their ground, they would have given the image that this change didn't live up to their wanted quality, instead this demonstrated that they are just giving up to peer-pressure because they don't want to lose "developer love".
- sillysaurusx 5y ago
  If someone reverts a bad decision, then that's objectively a good thing, regardless of the reasons.
  - prirun 5y ago
    They learned that they had the heat up too high and the frog noticed the water bubbling. So they lowered the heat.
  - pritambaral 5y ago
    "He paused beating his wife, because he had guests." Objectively, a good thing. Too bad it's useless, because the guests aren't gonna stay very long.
- sedatk 5y ago
  What's bad about not wanting to lose developer love?
  - skohan 5y ago
    The problem is they're showing they will behave as badly as they're allowed to. Not terribly good for trust if it takes backlash for them to act the right way.
    - DeathArrow 5y ago
      At least they shoved that they can undo a bad decision if the community asks for it. This reads like an apology and recognizing they've made a mistake: >We are always listening to our customers’ feedback to deliver on their needs. Thank you for making your feedback heard. We are sorry that we made so many community members upset via this change across many parameters including timing and execution. >Our desire is to create an open and vibrant ecosystem for .NET. As is true with many companies, we are learning to balance the needs of OSS community and being a corporate sponsor for .NET. Sometimes we don’t get it right. When we don’t, the best we can do is learn from our mistakes and be better moving forward. >Thank you for all of your feedback and your contributions over the years. We are committed to developing .NET in the open and look forward to continuing to work closely with the community. >Thank you! > Scott Hunter
      - skohan 5y ago
        I mean of course it reads like that - MS and similar corporations pay PR people quite a lot of money to craft messaging to frame things in the best possible way. This is not your personal friend or colleague asking forgiveness when they messed up, it's a multinational corporation acting in their own best interest, just as they did when they tried to get away with moving this feature from free to paid
  - pritambaral 5y ago
    That's certainly one way to frame it; though, I think, a very narrow view. They knew they were going to lose some 'developer love' when they originally made the decision. They went ahead anyway. So, your framing isn't adequate. What made them walk back is when they realised _how much_ they'd lose. Which happened only because lots of people were outraged and vocally spoke against it. Far more than the number of people they were expecting. It'd be naive to believe they didn't know they're going to lose some, especially given how long they've kept up their charade of 'MS :hearts: OSS'. What's more likely, and supported from evidence of their similar behaviour in other parts of their OSS charade, is that they thought they could get away with it this time too.
- sbelskie 5y ago
  I may have done a bad job articulating what I meant. My main point was that I feel (based on like 2nd and 3rd knowledge so could be totally wrong) that this had as much to do with public pressure as it did with a number of well known (and certainly many not well known) dotnet and Microsoft team members who fought for an OSS feature that they had been developing and promoting for most of this year.
  - pritambaral 5y ago
    > ... a number of well known (and certainly many not well known) dotnet and Microsoft team members who fought for ... That wasn't enough. I'm sure they fought for it before the public did. It took the public calling out Microsoft's duplicity for them to change face. I'm sure the insiders' voices helped, but they weren't adequate. IOW, Microsoft will absolutely do it again, if they think they can slip it past the public. Outrage can't be a driving force for very long, and they know that.
zmj 5y ago
High-stakes bets escalated to the public forum just to maintain the status quo aren't encouraging - even when the good guys win.
DeathArrow 5y ago
They won because the backlash from the .NET community. And community should keep an eye on .NET development. If we want to keep the nice things we have, we should work towards it.

capableweb 5y ago

Encouraging? Microsoft demonstrated here that the move wasn't because of quality or that the change was unable to be in the OSS version, they demonstrated that they only act a certain way because of the backlash. If they would have stand their ground, they would have given the image that this change didn't live up to their wanted quality, instead this demonstrated that they are just giving up to peer-pressure because they don't want to lose "developer love".

sillysaurusx 5y ago
If someone reverts a bad decision, then that's objectively a good thing, regardless of the reasons.
- prirun 5y ago
  They learned that they had the heat up too high and the frog noticed the water bubbling. So they lowered the heat.
- pritambaral 5y ago
  "He paused beating his wife, because he had guests." Objectively, a good thing. Too bad it's useless, because the guests aren't gonna stay very long.
sedatk 5y ago
What's bad about not wanting to lose developer love?
- skohan 5y ago
  The problem is they're showing they will behave as badly as they're allowed to. Not terribly good for trust if it takes backlash for them to act the right way.
  - DeathArrow 5y ago
    At least they shoved that they can undo a bad decision if the community asks for it. This reads like an apology and recognizing they've made a mistake: >We are always listening to our customers’ feedback to deliver on their needs. Thank you for making your feedback heard. We are sorry that we made so many community members upset via this change across many parameters including timing and execution. >Our desire is to create an open and vibrant ecosystem for .NET. As is true with many companies, we are learning to balance the needs of OSS community and being a corporate sponsor for .NET. Sometimes we don’t get it right. When we don’t, the best we can do is learn from our mistakes and be better moving forward. >Thank you for all of your feedback and your contributions over the years. We are committed to developing .NET in the open and look forward to continuing to work closely with the community. >Thank you! > Scott Hunter
    - skohan 5y ago
      I mean of course it reads like that - MS and similar corporations pay PR people quite a lot of money to craft messaging to frame things in the best possible way. This is not your personal friend or colleague asking forgiveness when they messed up, it's a multinational corporation acting in their own best interest, just as they did when they tried to get away with moving this feature from free to paid
- pritambaral 5y ago
  That's certainly one way to frame it; though, I think, a very narrow view. They knew they were going to lose some 'developer love' when they originally made the decision. They went ahead anyway. So, your framing isn't adequate. What made them walk back is when they realised _how much_ they'd lose. Which happened only because lots of people were outraged and vocally spoke against it. Far more than the number of people they were expecting. It'd be naive to believe they didn't know they're going to lose some, especially given how long they've kept up their charade of 'MS :hearts: OSS'. What's more likely, and supported from evidence of their similar behaviour in other parts of their OSS charade, is that they thought they could get away with it this time too.
sbelskie 5y ago
I may have done a bad job articulating what I meant. My main point was that I feel (based on like 2nd and 3rd knowledge so could be totally wrong) that this had as much to do with public pressure as it did with a number of well known (and certainly many not well known) dotnet and Microsoft team members who fought for an OSS feature that they had been developing and promoting for most of this year.
- pritambaral 5y ago
  > ... a number of well known (and certainly many not well known) dotnet and Microsoft team members who fought for ... That wasn't enough. I'm sure they fought for it before the public did. It took the public calling out Microsoft's duplicity for them to change face. I'm sure the insiders' voices helped, but they weren't adequate. IOW, Microsoft will absolutely do it again, if they think they can slip it past the public. Outrage can't be a driving force for very long, and they know that.

zmj 5y ago

High-stakes bets escalated to the public forum just to maintain the status quo aren't encouraging - even when the good guys win.

DeathArrow 5y ago

They won because the backlash from the .NET community. And community should keep an eye on .NET development. If we want to keep the nice things we have, we should work towards it.