[deleted]
Microsoft Refuses to Open Source VSCode Python Language Server
141–150 of 160 posts
Re: Microsoft Refuses to Open Source VSCode Python Language Server
#142In addition, Microsoft refuses to open source their remote VS Code implementation: https://github.com/microsoft/vscode-remote-release See issue: https://github.com/microsoft/vscode-remote-release/issues/17...
That extension is a competitive advantage that's crippling Jetbrains. Just business as usual.
What's preventing Jetbrains from making their own remote plugin if it's really crippling them? Also Jetbrains IDEs are closed source software, unlike VS Code, why are we supposed to feel bad for them again? That they're not making even more money?
Re: Microsoft Refuses to Open Source VSCode Python Language Server
#143Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The VSC Codebase (and functionality contained in it) isn't easily ported into competitor products (the fourth point) while Pylance is fully portable by design (could be incorporated into competitor products instantly!). Only if you consider the LSP standard (proposed and promulgated by MS themselves, made for and with VS Code) as not part of VS Code. My comment — "All of those reasons ... apply ... to VS Code itsel…
The LSP implementation for VS code is part of VS code OSS. Not all LSP language servers are. Just as the C# runtime can be open source, but not all C# programs are.
> The LSP implementation ...
See, you're still talking about the code. I am (and have been) talking about _the whole project_.
Because this isn't about just the code of Pylance. Open Source doesn't mean simply "show us the source code!". Simply making a portion of your code viewable is not sufficient for one to proclaim they "heart Open Source".
Re: Microsoft Refuses to Open Source VSCode Python Language Server
#144Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Does FOSS mandate that anything and everything must be open sourced? That is not the argument you're seeing here. There is no claim that any portions of MS's other IDEs (like the older, unrelated Visual Studio) be open sourced. This is only in the context of MS playing the façade that VS Code is "Open Source" and "Microsoft hearts Open Source" that such decisions fall under scrutiny. > And no, I didn't imply that F…
* VS Code is open source. * Microsoft's Python language server (used by multiple closed-source products) isn't. * The language server is compatible with VS Code. * Microsoft is providing a free licence to the language server. * Now people complain that it's not open source any more, because they provided a free licence to something compatible that is closed source. So we can have a code base, not change any of the co…
> VS Code is open source
Not quite: https://underjord.io/the-best-parts-of-visual-studio-code-ar...
> Microsoft's Python language server (used by multiple closed-source products)
Citation needed on "(used by multiple closed-source products)".
> Microsoft is providing a free licence to the language server.
No it isn't: https://github.com/microsoft/pylance-release/issues/4#issuec...
> ... any of the code ... | ... the first code base ... | ... a code base ... | ... amounts of code into to Open Source ...
You keep talking about the "code" / "code base". I'm talking about the whole project and how MS has been advertising itself. Open Source is NOT the same as "source available" and MS has not been advertising itself as "hearts source-available".
> ... more stuff for free.
Again, your perspective makes sense only if you think of "Free as in Beer" and not "Free as in Freedom". _Microsoft_ held _itself_ up to the latter standard, not random people on the internet.
Re: Microsoft Refuses to Open Source VSCode Python Language Server
#145Earlier quoted context omitted.
That extension is a competitive advantage that's crippling Jetbrains. Just business as usual.
What's preventing Jetbrains from making their own remote plugin if it's really crippling them? Also Jetbrains IDEs are closed source software, unlike VS Code, why are we supposed to feel bad for them again? That they're not making even more money?
> Also Jetbrains IDEs are closed source software
Not all of them:
1. https://github.com/JetBrains/intellij-community
2. https://github.com/JetBrains/intellij-plugins
3. https://www.jetbrains.com/pycharm/download/ (see how the Community Edition is Open Source)
Re: Microsoft Refuses to Open Source VSCode Python Language Server
#146Earlier quoted context omitted.
* VS Code is open source. * Microsoft's Python language server (used by multiple closed-source products) isn't. * The language server is compatible with VS Code. * Microsoft is providing a free licence to the language server. * Now people complain that it's not open source any more, because they provided a free licence to something compatible that is closed source. So we can have a code base, not change any of the co…
> VS Code is open source Not quite: https://underjord.io/the-best-parts-of-visual-studio-code-ar... > Microsoft's Python language server (used by multiple closed-source products) Citation needed on "(used by multiple closed-source products)". > Microsoft is providing a free licence to the language server. No it isn't: https://github.com/microsoft/pylance-release/issues/4#issuec... > ... any of the code ... | ... the…
The citation is in the 2nd link you posted, which lists closed source software that also uses pylance.
And in both instances I mean free as in beer.
Microsoft hasn’t held itself up to any standard. It said it would contribute to open source, where did it say they would open source everything?
Just because a company releases something open source doesn’t mean that other free software they release has to have open source licensing and all code available. It also doesn’t mean that they suddenly hate open source.
Are Mongo, Kafka and Android are open source? Do their parent companies all hate open source?
Re: Microsoft Refuses to Open Source VSCode Python Language Server
#147I still don't understand how they can get away with this given that VSCode is based on Blink which is LGPL
LGPL means only the library itself has to be open source, any other libraries or software that make use of the LGPL'D library can be closed.
it's not that simple, one has to argue that the whole software is its own work and not simply an extension of the library.
Quoting LGPLv3:
> An “Application” is any work that makes use of an interface provided by the Library, but which is not otherwise based on the Library. Defining a subclass of a class defined by the Library is deemed a mode of using an interface provided by the Library.
making a simple wrapper of a large LGPLv3 library is a more-than-grey area with the "not otherwise based on" wording.
Re: Microsoft Refuses to Open Source VSCode Python Language Server
#148Earlier quoted context omitted.
The LSP implementation for VS code is part of VS code OSS. Not all LSP language servers are. Just as the C# runtime can be open source, but not all C# programs are.
> The LSP implementation ... See, you're still talking about the code. I am (and have been) talking about _the whole project_. Because this isn't about just the code of Pylance. Open Source doesn't mean simply "show us the source code!". Simply making a portion of your code viewable is not sufficient for one to proclaim they "heart Open Source".
They made the whole editor open source, not just a portion of code.
And there is a closed-source product they have (pylance) which they have developed compatibility for.
Pylance is NOT part of VS code - It is compatible with it.
Re: Microsoft Refuses to Open Source VSCode Python Language Server
#149Almost the entire thread seems like a case of "give them a finger and they'll take the whole hand" Microsoft is a profit driven business, it never committed to open-sourcing every piece of software it writes, of course they're trying to somehow make money with VSCode, because it costs money to develop it. If you don't like it choose another one of the billion text editors and IDEs that exist or write a competitive la…
I thought the new monetisation ideology of New Microsoft was "push to Azure", and that they don't necessarily have to monetise specific products as long as you're kept in the ecosystem whose funnel is the aforementioned. Thoughts?
There is no singular monetisation strategy in Microsoft, it’s a bit more complicated than “all in on Azure”.
Re: Microsoft Refuses to Open Source VSCode Python Language Server
#150Earlier quoted context omitted.
Microsoft did promote it, at least in its early days, as an open and standard system, and the LSP as a way to go from MxN language specific IDE implementations to M+N. But tben, they make it 2xM+N by forbidding the use of their LSPs in other editors - which, if done by everyone would put as back at MxN. This is hypocritical behavior, and it does remind people of EE&E which was Microsoft’s explicit policy in the past.…
> by forbidding the use of their LSPs in other editors How can they prevent my, let’s say vim, client from connecting to a closed-source server if they both speak the same protocol?
As pritambaral mentioned, they can make some minor changes to the server that are just enough to cause the client to no longer work.
This isn't exactly unheard of when it comes to Microsoft. I mean, you don't have to go far to find an example of them doing exactly that -- there's prime example [0] right here in this thread!
(Alsa known as "extend"; see also "Active Directory")
--