Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

We are moving the Roslyn code to GitHub

blogs.msdn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 225 posts

Re: We are moving the Roslyn code to GitHub

#181

Post by sillysaurus3 »

jenscow wrote: post #166
brudgers wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been listening my way through the archive of Scott Hanselman's hanselminutes podcasts. Microsoft has been striving to be on the right side of history in regard to open source for five or six years. It's all out in the open. Moving to Github is simply developer friendly. Don't misunderstand me. Microsoft's products compete with open source software in the marketplace for developer mindshare and I am not suggestin…

> It's all out in the open. Really? So they release the source to a few of their developer frameworks and tools, and they're now "all open"? Don't get me wrong, as a long time C# developer I do appreciate the gesture and I'm especially happy that they're working their "not invented here" mentality, but with simply providing us with the source code that we already have anyway (via ilspy), all of this just seems over-i…

Completely agreed. Once Microsoft releases the VS source code, I'll be completely sold on the idea that it's reformed. Until then, this seems like very effective developer relations management.

Re: We are moving the Roslyn code to GitHub

#182

Post by edpichler »

chrisdone wrote: post #137
edpichler wrote: post #136

Microsoft has being doing good decisions lately. They are becoming more open, also integrating more with industry leaders. Another good strategic decision they made was the partnership with Dropbox ( https://blog.dropbox.com/2014/11/dropbox-microsoft-office-pa... ) not mattering if they already have a similar service (OneDrive). To me, these are signals of a good administration. This company is changing to keep growi…

Call me cynical, but the first thing that springs to mind with these kind of opening up is the sign of a company no longer with the bullying power to not care about being open. Rather than these changes occurring because a hierarchy of managers had a change of heart (look guys, they learned that open source is good!), a market share drop from 97% to 20% makes you humbled and reconsider your strategy, and products tha…

Totally agreed! My comment was about the decisions they made lately due to the power they are losing last years. It's better late than never.

Re: We are moving the Roslyn code to GitHub

#183

Post by Sanddancer »

moron4hire wrote: post #149
c17r wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As long as you are backing up your repo in some way, you don't. But these sites just make it easy.

Considering you have to use git to use github, isn't it always an extra step to use github for a private project?

There are lots of tools, like tortoisegit, that make that extra step a triviality.

Re: We are moving the Roslyn code to GitHub

#184

Post by Retra »

Encosia wrote: post #178
Retra wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, as a fairly broke student who doesn't own any Windows computers (and who's plenty tired of Java), I've found that getting into C# is unnecessarily unpleasant. It doesn't help that everybody's advice seems to be "get Visual Studio." I'm sure it's great, and if I put more effort into it I might get something to work. But it is a real barrier: Why should I jump to C# if it isn't actually any more convenient?

As a student, you should look into this program: https://www.dreamspark.com/ There are some great cross-platform developments in the pipeline that should allow you to have a native Linux experience approaching VS the future, but you really should use VS if you want the best experience with C#/.NET today. DreamSpark will give you access to free licenses of Windows and VS (and other Microsoft software), that you can in…

I will look into that, thanks.

Re: We are moving the Roslyn code to GitHub

#185

Post by bunderbunder »

jenscow wrote: post #166
brudgers wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been listening my way through the archive of Scott Hanselman's hanselminutes podcasts. Microsoft has been striving to be on the right side of history in regard to open source for five or six years. It's all out in the open. Moving to Github is simply developer friendly. Don't misunderstand me. Microsoft's products compete with open source software in the marketplace for developer mindshare and I am not suggestin…

> It's all out in the open. Really? So they release the source to a few of their developer frameworks and tools, and they're now "all open"? Don't get me wrong, as a long time C# developer I do appreciate the gesture and I'm especially happy that they're working their "not invented here" mentality, but with simply providing us with the source code that we already have anyway (via ilspy), all of this just seems over-i…

This isn't big because Microsoft has stared sharing source. The source to the .NET framework has been available _without_ ILSpy for years now.

This is big because Microsoft is truly embracing an open source development model. They've opened most of the .NET platform up to the whole shebang - pull requests, copying code into other projects, forking, all that good stuff.

Re: We are moving the Roslyn code to GitHub

#186

Post by s-phi-nl »

woodman wrote: post #155
bunderbunder wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This. GPL is just really really hard to work around if you're selling non-SAAS products. In general, it's not something you try to do if you have any alternative. And nowadays, you almost always have an alternative. Increasingly often it's a more capable, more actively maintained, and better supported option that comes with the added bonus of not needing to take the time to get special approval from your legal depart…

> if you're selling non-SAAS products Pretty funny, considering how much RMS dislikes SAAS.

I do not know, but I suspect this is exactly why RMS dislikes SAAS: because it can technically obey a license without having to give users the freedoms he designed the GPL to give.

Re: We are moving the Roslyn code to GitHub

#187

Post by goblin89 »

moron4hire wrote: post #120
zubspace wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Free private repositories and out-of-the-box mercurial support. Works well for those small side projects which you do not (yet) want to maintain. I have lots of stuff in there which i want to keep as reference for projects to come and would never want to release to the public.

If you don't yet want to publish, why do you need GitHub or Bitbucket? Why not just keep the repository local?

> If you don't yet want to publish, why do you need GitHub or Bitbucket? Why not just keep the repository local?

There are some reasons, in my opinion:

    * Zero friction to start publishing (in case you suddenly want to)
    * Zero friction to start collaborating
    * Off-site backup
    * A kind of self-discipline boost and desire to make your thing publish-ready
      (get your README, license, packaging in order, organize stuff nicely,
      observe practices good repositories out there employ. This one could be
      just me, though, and I suppose it somewhat decreases for private repositories)
    * Built-in issue management (might be relevant even for personal projects)
    * Nicer GUI to view the repository structure

Re: We are moving the Roslyn code to GitHub

#188

Post by bunderbunder »

s-phi-nl wrote: post #186
woodman wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if you're selling non-SAAS products Pretty funny, considering how much RMS dislikes SAAS.

I do not know, but I suspect this is exactly why RMS dislikes SAAS: because it can technically obey a license without having to give users the freedoms he designed the GPL to give.

It's deeper than that. By its very nature, SAAS precludes every single one of the freedoms that the GPL is designed to give.

The GPL isn't really about sharing source code; that's just a means to an end. The GPL is about being able to exercise complete control over - and having complete knowledge of - all the software that you use. To an approximation, SAAS is about the opposite of that.

Re: We are moving the Roslyn code to GitHub

#189

Post by terrajobst »

farresito wrote: post #50

What were they previously using before the switch to git? Mercurial?

The teams that still use centralized version control, such as Windows and Office, are either using Team Foundation Version Control (TFVC) or Source Depot (an internal tool that was built using a source code license of Perforce).

The developer division (DevDiv) currently mostly uses TFVC. For the open source projects this doesn't make a lot of sense though, which is why most these are moving to git.

Of course, we're a big company so you'll also find Mercurial and SVN, especially in MSR. I really hope that you don't find SourceSafe anymore though :-)

Post reply on HN