tl;dr Microsoft says fuck you devs.
Microsoft under fire again from open-source .NET devs: Hot Reload feature pulled for sake of Visual Studio sales
Microsoft has enraged the open-source .NET community by removing flagship functionality from open-source .NET to bolster the appeal of Visual Studio, not least against its cross-platform cousin Visual Studio Code. The two key pieces in this latest unrest are this pull request in the open-source .NET SDK repository on GitHub, …
This post has been deleted by its author
Friday 22nd October 2021 22:49 GMT Anonymous Coward
Well, so the obvious has finally been established on a very consistent pattern.
They did not really change. They just realized that there's no cloud service without open source support.
Now, same goes for most of the other cloud behemoths, so whatever. It's not like Google's AOSP or Chromium are really that committed to openness, or Amazon's forks entirely born out of a thirst for some good old Extend, Embrace, Extinguish, are due to their absolute commitment to the cause.
Still, if anyone out there expected anything other than tacit acknowledgement, they are sure to be disappointed now.
As they should. Hopefully that'll bring awareness to the ones naive enough to waste their time contributing to these project.
Saturday 23rd October 2021 00:41 GMT Peter-Waterman1
Same old Msft
Satya Nadella was rising in the ranks during the Ballmer era, in fact, he was a senior exec. When he took over as the man, they polished him up, branded him as the all-new face of the new, softer, Microsoft. The reality is the culture is the same as it always has been, focused on keeping their Windows monopoly protected at the expense of their customers while pretending they are the good guys. Just look at what licencing changes they are pushing recently - removing MSDN rights from other clouds, removing Windows Bring your own licence from other clouds, changing SQL licencing on other clouds, stopping you run office on other clouds, increasing SPLA licencing costs for other clouds. Now they are starting to renege on their promise of open-source...Same old Microsoft and more fool you if you believe their PR bullshit.
Saturday 23rd October 2021 03:30 GMT ecofeco
Saturday 23rd October 2021 10:31 GMT Dan 55
Saturday 23rd October 2021 11:53 GMT Anonymous Coward
Saturday 23rd October 2021 13:23 GMT captain veg
Sunday 24th October 2021 02:53 GMT IamAProton
Re: correct me if I'm wrong...
I remember it was working in VB6. Hit a breakpoint, fix the code, keep going.
They reintroduced it years ago, but I've never been able to use it (= the 'out of the box experience' sucks).
Now I hit a breakpoint, I forget debugger iss running, I change the code, VS asks me if I want to edit or stop, I say, "Edit, why not?" and It doesn't work so I restart the debugger.
That's with the .net framework that works (not the core), I assume in the .net core is equally bad.
Saturday 23rd October 2021 23:42 GMT F.Domestica
One of the "fun" things about dealing with Microsquish is that they're really bad at getting everyone to agree ob a shared strategy. I have seen situations where, eg, the rep from the browser group was working hard to promote an idea while the rep from the database group was apparently there to throw up roadblocks. A coherent message and consistent policy may be too much to hope for at any moment, never mind from week to week. Ditto learning from past mistakes; that too requires that they talk to each other (if not to the developers).
So this doesn't _have_ to be malicious. But that doesn't make it much less of an issue.
I am using .net right now under protest, because the tooling I want to use is biased toward it. Otherwise, especially given that it seems to be "cast in Jello", I'd have continued to avoid/ignore it.
Saturday 23rd October 2021 23:47 GMT adamXpeter
Sunday 24th October 2021 02:48 GMT IamAProton
We made a mistake in executing on our decision [because we thought we could get away with it]
I'm developing in the MS world for more than a decade.
Usually with MS the "development experience" has always been good. I understand they are a business and they have to keep getting new devs on board; in the past it was basic/access/vb, everybody is a developer! (and we are still paying the price now, just look at what kind of garbage software is running in any sizeable company), recently they shifted into the opensource-(nothing wrong with it)-hipster-kids-pleasing mode and the whole .net core has been very disappointing. Version after version with breaking changes, even between 'point' releases. And what's worse is that everybody seems super excited to jump on it, like a new update for an app, doesn't matter if it's objectively worse.
I've managed to stay almost entirely out of it (still have to deal with application written by others...) and still targeting .net 4.8 if I'm sure the application is going to be needed for just few years. Good job MS.
The .net framework is(was?) good to build applications quickly, without getting lost into managing memory and other tedious things and so far it worked well,
I don't care if it's 10% slower than C++. One of its winning features was consistency: I've updated dozens of applications going through version after version without an issue, now try to update .net core 2.0 to 2.1 or, god forbid, 3.1. A fucking headache, worse then the infamous DLL-hell.
I am a "MS developer" but I use Linux since few years. I'm loyal to stuff-that-works; If MS manages to piss off the new kids that feels manly because they have to use command line (because the tooling is missing) it could be a problem in the long run.
PostgreSQL? Never thought about it since recently. Now it's running on my dev pc ;-)
As a senior developer (=my opinion matters when company has to spend money, in case MS is reading) I am trying not to get too tied to MS (avoid all the cloudy MS specific things).
I recommend them to get their shit together quickly before it's too late.
Sunday 24th October 2021 08:11 GMT chuBb.
Unsurprised at the climb down, my gut always said it would be reinstated in the 2022.1 update because they learnt lessons from shipping ef migrations without a ui.. . The whole justification sounded much more like "can't schedule a working ui before rtm" than "mwahahahaha suckers premium feature only" truth is probably between those two though. Still a lot of 90s bulmerites in senior roles in redmond
As for all the hoo Haa it's just young bloods finding out ms's lipservice to Foss is just that, and they will be first to complain about a "janky workflow" with initial release. Then be shocked to discover ms build is its own dsl, and its always quicker to write a batch file and invoke it during build than to let vs handle it...
Sunday 24th October 2021 15:22 GMT Anonymous Coward
"Hot Reload feature pulled for sake of Visual Studio sales"
Except for the fact that they give away the community edition of Visual Studio for free, and the code has already been merged back into dotnet watch. But that doesn't make a great story I guess, much better to just bash Microsoft...
Monday 25th October 2021 12:28 GMT Anonymous Coward
> Except for the fact that they give away the community edition of Visual Studio for free
Are you quite sure about that? Free to individuals maybe but my $large-SI employer has signed up to some shit licensing deal whereby we're not allowed to install the community edition. I'm supposed to use the pukka VS. That's great except that my job title is not "developer" therefore I don't get VS automatically and so I need a project code to charge it against and get someone to raise a mandatory purchase order. That rather puts the kybosh on a quick proof of concept before committing to one way or another to something.
It's not just MS: VMware are doing the same with VMware Studio where I now have to jump through hoops to get a licence. And since it's only a fiver a month or something silly, the internal cost of raising a PO is far more than that so it won't happen.
Monday 25th October 2021 15:55 GMT jilocasin
"...give away the community edition of Visual Studio for free..."
but last I checked it's a Windows only product.
Mac users get the warmed over, rebranded Ximian Studio and Linux users are poop outta luck.
Of course, .Net is supposedly open source. One doesn't usually strip working features just to give your proprietary product a leg up on the community.
Sunday 24th October 2021 15:55 GMT Anonymous Coward
Huh? What just happened?
I think chuBb got it about right. We're seeing a lot of this "can't schedule...blah blah blah". "Resource constraints". etc. Same bs justification Mozilla gave for yanking the rug out from under PWAs in desktop Firefox. Still, as chu writes, there are those in Redmond who still think "embrace, extend, extinguish" was a fine strategy and so bear watching. In this case it looks like the reaction of the community was both rapid enough and loud enough to prevent Microsoft from "snatching defeat from the jaws of victory".
Sunday 24th October 2021 16:31 GMT Anonymous Coward
Monday 25th October 2021 05:53 GMT amanfromMars 1
The real terror Microsoft is really worried about ....... and probably quite a few others too
A denial from Microsoft will not change the shape and the flavour and the course of future developers event horizons which wrest leading control leverage out of the cold cruel hands of parasitic corporations and wannabe authoritarians ....
In the very near future will that be somewhat reversed with Cloud developers presenting to ARM/silicon partners virtual requirements for chip designs to execute proprietary intellectual property via coded instruction sets which realise in a certain universally acceptable order, a very specific pre-ordained result. ....... https://forums.theregister.com/forum/all/2021/10/18/arms_virtual_hardware/#c_4351591
Monday 25th October 2021 13:55 GMT ZippyÂ´s Sausage Factory
"is Microsoft serious about .NET being an open-source platform?"
They're serious about people treating .NET as though it were as developer-friendly as an open-source platform, and they're serious about trying to get all the benefits that being open-source might grant them.
But do they actually want it to be open-source? No, of course not. Anything that brings in more money, in the eyes of Microsoft's KPI-loving MBAs, is better than anything that brings in less money. And the first question any manager who's tasked with profits first, customers second is going to ask is "but... can't we charge money for that"?
Also, what's the offs that the feature - that would, as open source, have been available in all versions of Visual Studio - will now likely be available only in the frighteningly expensive "Enterprise" version of Visual Studio?
Monday 25th October 2021 14:54 GMT Robert Carnegie
Monday 25th October 2021 19:07 GMT Anonymous Coward
Open Source and Community Driven are not the same thing, unless you think that the author of a book wants your critique and suggestions as to how they could do the plot better, complaining that MS dont want your contributions is the same thing.
Lots of Open Source Projects are Community Driven but not all
Lots of Closed Source things are also community driven (just look at the online games that succeed and continue to succeed)
Monday 25th October 2021 13:57 GMT amanfromMars 1
A Virtually Real Persecution ..... and/or Just Desserts Levelling Up the Playing Field ‽ .
If .NET is truly open source... then presumably it may be time to stick a fork in it. ..... Adair
That's another worry already well done and now prone to terrifying Microsoft because of what IT can do to/for Operating Systems Administrators/Special Operations Executives ....... and that be, some ambulance chasing lawyers types might insist, a suitable case for the award and reward of monumental punitive damages in a classy action prosecution exploring negligent proprietary intellectual property development in-house.
Monday 25th October 2021 15:52 GMT Kev99
I'm not a developer so pardon my ignorance. And personally, if .Net is coded as well as microsoft's other products I'd never touch it.
So my curiosoty asks why couldn't a code pull those few hundred lines and drop them into whatever project they're working on? Isn't .net supposed to be "open source"?
Monday 25th October 2021 19:14 GMT Anonymous Coward
You could, but it would require people to install and use your forked copy, not impossible just a non desirable solution for mass adoption.
As i said above, open source is not the same as community driven, their are plenty of open source projects where the source is free, but the docs and support only exist if you pay a hefty fee, and good luck getting it up and running if you dont have time to pick apart the code to work out just what the magic config file value should be, yes is open source but thats not the same as making it useful or even wanting community contributions to its code base apart from reproducable bug reports.