391–400 of 433 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
DataGrip would be perfect if it had a community edition. As someone who connects to a database only two or three times a week, I’m not willing to pay for it.
Yeah I already have the all-products pack for Goland, Clion, and Resharper, I wouldn't have purchased DataGrip separately
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So usually one is the “main” but, personally speaking, I’d just say “don’t do it,” for the obvious issues I suspect you’re aware of ;-) By “don’t do it,” I mean having multiple apps talk to one DB schema.
"don't do it" is the right answer. Others have pointed it out as well, many large SaaS companies I worked with, have had apps owning their databases. Anyone else needs anything - use APIs (and ETL if you need everything)
Services are slow, restrictive, and don't enjoy the benefits of an actual DBMS, like transactions. You also add additional dependencies and failure points.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That is seemingly true of a bunch of tools. I am using an official Microsoft Python library - the repo is public on GitHub, but all of the CI or other backend integration is behind the Microsoft curtain, so it is impossible for the public to actually participate. The cherry on top is that the team that used to support the tool was impacted, so now nobody can maintain the thing.
I am curious: Which library?
You can find workarounds, but it is an awful situation. Now the community is probably going to have to re-fork the library back to the public for maintenance.
I am clearly not a bean counter, but if Microsoft wants its database to win against the free options, they could do their best to ensure popular libraries can seamlessly connect.
https://github.com/microsoft/mssql-django/issues/418#issueco...
It has a proprietary license[0]. That makes it a non-starter. Too bad: it looks nifty! > The software is licensed, not sold. Microsoft reserves all other rights. Unless applicable law gives you more rights despite this limitation, you will not (and have no right to):[…] d) use the software for commercial, non-profit, or revenue-generating activities Oops. Better not install this on your work laptop! [0] https://marke…
Remember the old adage, embrace, extend, extinguish.
They will extinguish postgres?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Microsoft has a long history of dishonest behavior Can you point out such recent behavior that isn't just echoing other peoples opinions from the anti-trust case from over two decades ago? It's been my experience that many people seem to "borrow" their opinion about Microsoft from things they've read rather than personal experience so we keep getting the same low-effort criticism ad nauseam.
If eight years is recent enough, Microsoft moved its German office to Munich and got the city of Munich to shut down its Linux migration in return. Not exactly dishonest, but a power move to destroy the competition that I happen to be rooting for. Personal experience is irrelevant if the facts are not in doubt. One of these is that Microsoft was a pretty bad actor when nobody reigned them in, and I was around at the…
> One of these is that Microsoft was a pretty bad actor when nobody reigned them in, and I was around at the time.
So was I (was working in Redmond at the time), and their behavior was no worse than what Apple or Google are up to today. The anti-trust case itself was 90% theater, Microsoft was let off with a slap on the wrist but somehow popular culture has decided it was much more devastating than it really was because it reinforces their "M$ bad" bias. It's hard for me not to chalk comments like this to the "borrowed" bucket rather than researched and well-informed opinion, and it just convinces me further than when it comes to Microsoft people are borrowing their opinions rather than earning them.
Yes, Microsoft made some dick moves over 25 years ago and paid for it. They continue to operate like every other business in 2025 despite being the largest company in the world by market cap. At some point folks can't keep pulling up this card like it's a wildcard-win-all.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Their existing and continued contributions to vscode are significant, so I think they can be allowed to keep some cards up their sleeves like the plugin marketplace or their Python extension. It would have been fine if MS had started with their Python extension being proprietary, that would have been up front and transparent. Instead, they lured folks in (no small part due to open source), and once it became popula…
> It would have been fine if MS had started with their Python extension being proprietary Except that never happened. Pyright was released first and was and continues to be open source. Pylance was built on Pyright but has never been open source. No promises or commitments were made otherwise. Deprecating the open source Python Language Server in favor of Pylance is also a perfectly reasonable and valid decision - th…
No, the first Python extension that shipped with vscode 1.0 in 2016 was called the "Microsoft Python Language Server" and was based on the Jedi LSP. Below is the deprecation announcement of the Jedi language server in the Pylance launch post below.
> In the short-term, you will still be able to use the Microsoft Python Language Server as your choice of language server when writing Python in Visual Studio Code. > Our long-term plan is to transition our Microsoft Python Language Server users over to Pylance and eventually deprecate and remove the old language server as a supported option. https://devblogs.microsoft.com/python/announcing-pylance-fas...
> But they are probably worried about Windsurf and Cursor, the latter of which (a billion-dollar company) was caught violating MS's TOS around the plugin ecosystem.
If that were so, I would certainly understand. However, MS started closing vscode and the extensions years before Windsurf and Cursor (initial release in 2023). This was their business model all along get adoption in partly by leveraging the open source community, and then close things off slowly once they have a choke hold (similar to Android/AOSP). I could scarcely agree more that Windserf and Cursor are supremely sketchy and generally scummy companies.
Consider MS launch announcement that focuses on open source, extensibility, open community, and a promise to be transparent with their intentions (i.e., vision) and roadmap...
> From the beginning, we’ve striven to be as open as possible in our roadmap and vision for VS Code, and in November, we took that a step further by open-sourcing VS Code and adding the ability for anyone to make it better through submitting issues and feedback, making pull requests, or creating extensions.
https://code.visualstudio.com/blogs/2016/04/14/vscode-1.0/#_...
Except they weren't open and did a u-turn on the community a few years later. MS started closing sources and locked things down a few years later despite touting the benefits of being open and open source in the announcement above. Now they have architected the Python extension so it only runs on vscode, and will not run at all on any fork, which is pretty shady after promising transparency and openness.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It would have been fine if MS had started with their Python extension being proprietary Except that never happened. Pyright was released first and was and continues to be open source. Pylance was built on Pyright but has never been open source. No promises or commitments were made otherwise. Deprecating the open source Python Language Server in favor of Pylance is also a perfectly reasonable and valid decision - th…
> Pyright was released first and was and continues to be open source. Pylance was built on Pyright but has never been open source. No, the first Python extension that shipped with vscode 1.0 in 2016 was called the "Microsoft Python Language Server" and was based on the Jedi LSP. Below is the deprecation announcement of the Jedi language server in the Pylance launch post below. > In the short-term, you will still be a…
> The new, free language server
Pylance isn't the same extension as what was originally shipped, it's an entirely different product. Your link backs up my argument, not yours. Releasing an open source project doesn't not obligate them to continue supporting that project indefinitely, and the decision to migrate to a closed-source plugin is a perfectly valid and reasonable decision. Disagreeing with it doesn't mean they've somehow magically violated some implicit obligation you think they owe "the community".
> MS started closing vscode and the extensions years
They never "started". The plugin marketplace and vscode - the proprietary version of "Code - OSS" - has always been proprietary and closed. At no point did they give you something and take it away. Deciding to release a closed-source replacement for an open-source tool is not the same thing, and it's bad faith to argue otherwise to fit your fundamentally flawed argument.
> This was their business model all along get adoption in partly by leveraging the open source community
>Consider MS launch announcement that focuses on open source, extensibility, open community
You're relying on hand-wavy assertions without any evidence to back it up.
> Except they weren't open and did a u-turn on the community a few years later.
Where's the u-turn? I don't see anything in this post that's not true in 2025. Microsoft offers a curated plugin marketplace that's proprietary to vscode, and they provide distribution and hosting for free without requiring anything from creators and users. Pylance continues to be free but closed, Code - OSS continues to be FOSS, vscode continues to be a proprietary version of Code - OSS, plugin authors continue to upload products free-of-charge, and users continue to benefit from that community that Microsoft has fostered.
They've firmly established what their role is in this relationship. There's never been ambiguity between what's vscode closed-source and what's code - oss, unless you've not put in the effort to find out.
Point to an actual, concrete example of where they've acted in bad faith, did a "u-turn", or reneged on a public statement rather than hand-wavy generalizations. It's on you if you've relied on second-hand HN comments and news headlines to build your opinion, and relying on misunderstanding of context isn't a convincing argument.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Providing access to other services is what APIs are for. Jeff Bezos famously said[1] that anyone who does otherwise should be fired, and I agree. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18916406
the reason he did that was for business reasons. He wanted to be able to expose any part of the stack as a public service to external customers, and vice versa, to let his internal service compete against the publicly available ones. But this is only valid when you're trying to build AWS. Not everyone does that. Relational databases have extensive permission systems for a reason.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That "works" for about as long as you have <10 employees and <3 customers or so. After that the railsapp doesn't get to be the sole owner of the db.
Providing access to other services is what APIs are for. Jeff Bezos famously said[1] that anyone who does otherwise should be fired, and I agree. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18916406
Yeah, and databases expose extensive APIs with extremely battle-tested security and permissions models for multiple consumers.