5 ms·

A hot-button issue gets corrected now, but then they continue to make subtler moves. Why say you love open-source if you keep the juicy bits of Visual Studio Co

by usui 5y ago

A hot-button issue gets corrected now, but then they continue to make subtler moves. Why say you love open-source if you keep the juicy bits of Visual Studio Code closed-source? More like you love open-source... for making money. Microsoft is a big company with changing microcultures all the time. They alone as a whole should not take credit for their open-source endeavors. In general, big contributor names should be emphasized more, so that we know when they leave Microsoft or the project.

oaiey 5y ago
The key difference between the two situation is, that the vs code team does it juicy features as a secret project. Dotnet watch was developed, tested and licensed in the public and stripped out last second. VS Code behavior you can accept as a open core or commercial plugin thing. The other thing was just a theft.
- oaiey 5y ago
  I want to extend in this a bit: Scott, Damian, Scott, David, Rich, Immo ... If you read this: fight for a clear ahead of time separation of commercial and non commercial features. Many of us can understand that Microsoft still sells dev tools but we do not like bad communication and stuff taking away which have been there already (at the same time we also think that .NET can only become truly awesome when free tools exists ... because für your competition these exists).
  - sbelskie 5y ago
    The reason why I feel somewhat encouraged is because my understanding is that this exact group of people fighting to keep this in is why it was reverted. I have no idea who knew what when or how anyone would have reacted without public scrutiny but David Fowler has been hyping hot reload since at least May on Twitter and it seems obvious to me that he and many other team members were 100% behind the planned dotnet watch hot reload approach. Maybe public outcry gave them the ammunition to fight this fight, and I may be naive, but I have a hard time thinking that at least some of that group wasn’t against this decision from the beginning (though who knows if they even learned about it much in advance of it being public).
duddyggvrvg 5y ago
I don't understand the complaint when the open-source community seem perfectly happy to provide free labor. That's all it ever was. The rest like like name emphasis is just culture.
angelzen 5y ago
Inexorably, the locus of making money moves from using one's skill and ability to build software to skimming rent off enormous capital investments: billions of ad impressions, billions of e-commerce transactions, millions of cloud cpus, Somebody built awesome software and dares charging money for it? Bring on the tar and feathers!
johnfn 5y ago
> Why say you love open-source if you keep the juicy bits of Visual Studio Code closed-source? More like you love open-source... for making money. I really dislike this mindset. Sure, it's disappointing that some pieces of VSCode aren't open-sourced, but man, they open-sourced an entire IDE and plugin ecosystem. That's such a fantastic contribution to the open source community, and yet I see comments like yours that treat it as if it's negligible and somehow want even more? Why is it that, say, Intellij never has to deal with this level of scrutiny? The work MS did even includes a bunch work on existing plugins they don't even own - I know this because my plugin was one which they got their engineers to do a couple months of volunteer work on. If MS wants to retain a few small pieces of tech to pay the engineers that make a fantastic IDE and ecosystem free and open source for everyone, so be it. You say "making money" as if it's some great evil - how do you think all those open source engineers get paid?
- asddubs 5y ago
  IntelliJ doesn't pretend to be anything it's not. VSCode does act as a bit of a trojan horse with its proprietary extensions. I do think it's a bit of a smokescreen
  - zaphirplane 5y ago
    In what way ? Jet brains makes a free open source product and has a paid for product with extra features Ms makes a free open source product with a paid product with more features (thou different code base)
    - asddubs 5y ago
      vscode is heavily marketed as open source, not open core. yet key microsoft extensions are closed, as people are often surprised to find out
      - DeathArrow 5y ago
        Make yourself a coffee, get in front of the keyboard and start writing code to replace those extensions.

by usui 5y ago

oaiey 5y ago

The key difference between the two situation is, that the vs code team does it juicy features as a secret project. Dotnet watch was developed, tested and licensed in the public and stripped out last second. VS Code behavior you can accept as a open core or commercial plugin thing. The other thing was just a theft.

oaiey 5y ago
I want to extend in this a bit: Scott, Damian, Scott, David, Rich, Immo ... If you read this: fight for a clear ahead of time separation of commercial and non commercial features. Many of us can understand that Microsoft still sells dev tools but we do not like bad communication and stuff taking away which have been there already (at the same time we also think that .NET can only become truly awesome when free tools exists ... because für your competition these exists).
- sbelskie 5y ago
  The reason why I feel somewhat encouraged is because my understanding is that this exact group of people fighting to keep this in is why it was reverted. I have no idea who knew what when or how anyone would have reacted without public scrutiny but David Fowler has been hyping hot reload since at least May on Twitter and it seems obvious to me that he and many other team members were 100% behind the planned dotnet watch hot reload approach. Maybe public outcry gave them the ammunition to fight this fight, and I may be naive, but I have a hard time thinking that at least some of that group wasn’t against this decision from the beginning (though who knows if they even learned about it much in advance of it being public).

duddyggvrvg 5y ago

I don't understand the complaint when the open-source community seem perfectly happy to provide free labor. That's all it ever was. The rest like like name emphasis is just culture.

angelzen 5y ago

Inexorably, the locus of making money moves from using one's skill and ability to build software to skimming rent off enormous capital investments: billions of ad impressions, billions of e-commerce transactions, millions of cloud cpus, Somebody built awesome software and dares charging money for it? Bring on the tar and feathers!

johnfn 5y ago

> Why say you love open-source if you keep the juicy bits of Visual Studio Code closed-source? More like you love open-source... for making money. I really dislike this mindset. Sure, it's disappointing that some pieces of VSCode aren't open-sourced, but man, they open-sourced an entire IDE and plugin ecosystem. That's such a fantastic contribution to the open source community, and yet I see comments like yours that treat it as if it's negligible and somehow want even more? Why is it that, say, Intellij never has to deal with this level of scrutiny? The work MS did even includes a bunch work on existing plugins they don't even own - I know this because my plugin was one which they got their engineers to do a couple months of volunteer work on. If MS wants to retain a few small pieces of tech to pay the engineers that make a fantastic IDE and ecosystem free and open source for everyone, so be it. You say "making money" as if it's some great evil - how do you think all those open source engineers get paid?

asddubs 5y ago
IntelliJ doesn't pretend to be anything it's not. VSCode does act as a bit of a trojan horse with its proprietary extensions. I do think it's a bit of a smokescreen
- zaphirplane 5y ago
  In what way ? Jet brains makes a free open source product and has a paid for product with extra features Ms makes a free open source product with a paid product with more features (thou different code base)
  - asddubs 5y ago
    vscode is heavily marketed as open source, not open core. yet key microsoft extensions are closed, as people are often surprised to find out
    - DeathArrow 5y ago
      Make yourself a coffee, get in front of the keyboard and start writing code to replace those extensions.