This is also interesting on the editor front: will MS keep investing aggressively in both Atom and VS Code?
Will also be interesting to see how the relationship VSTS and github shakes out. VSTS has some really, really awesome and nice features…
3 Likes
Ditto. The worry with github was always that it wouldn’t be acquired, eventually investors would stop wanting to pump absurd amounts of money into free hosting for open source products, and that github would be forced to do sourceforge-style shadiness to survive.
In the short-run, I bet nothing changes with atom vs. vscode, in the medium-term it probably helps everyone if they merge them, and in the long-term it might hurt if there is less corporate-sponsored competition between editors. Regardless, for my time-horizon I think it only helps.
6 Likes
Compared to the future of atom, I am more concerned about xray.
2 Likes
Mais non! Quelle horreur! I had forgotten that Atom is a GitHub project.
Atom being the cat’s pyjamas of editors.
Their whole business model is to initially find ways to make it nice so that more and more users tend to rely on it, so that later they can turn around and screw you without risk of you jumping ship. So I’m not sure a few shiny new toys in the short run makes me feel much better about it…
(For what it’s worth I definitely agree that MS is capable of making some really nice stuff.)
1 Like
I don’t think it is their business model.
Tell you the truth, it sounds more like “I’m on the camp who hates Microsoft”.
Business must earn to stay alive.
On the other way I think the current global climate in the business world has shifted into a climate where being fair, being open, doing the right thing in the wide sense of things is the way to go and this is the best regulator to the business world.
Hence I think the current move is great to anyone using GitHub.
It’s not like I just made this up for the hell of it. This tactic is well documented (and references therein).
The ironic thing is that in many cases I like Microsoft a lot better than its competitors and I sort of root for them sometimes, but I’m not going to pretend that they don’t do horrible things.
6 Likes
If they start requiring a microsoft login, im definitely transferring off github. Sure, it’s nice they want to support free software, but I’d be weary of their Embrace, Extend, Extinguish strategy.
1 Like
I think those times on the internet have come and gone, Those happy naive days were fun though. Microsoft just doesn’t have it in its DNA to be open. They bought GitHub, like LinkedIn, for a reason.
The main thing to watch for is to avoid getting trapped in an aggressive subscription model (e.g. what they did to Microsoft Office, and what they are trying to do with Azure). Git itself is very portable; you can host it yourself (and I will be removing my own from GitHub soon).
But the interesting thing for a project like this are the issues, pull management, project management. Those are the sticky things that keep customers and also provide lots of “interesting” data mining. Once there are thousands of issues (Julia has 11k closed, 2k open), it’s hard to get the project untangled.
Unified user IDs just put it over the top, because that lets the data miner join databases… wouldn’t it “make sense” to join your GitHub ID with your LinkedIn ID? It would from a UX point of view - it’s simpler for the user, and it’s all of your “development persona”, but that’s too much foothold for me to give them.
Wait and watch, while freeing options, is a good strategy.
3 Likes
Interesting!
All of the core application code other than the view logic should be written in Rust. This will ensure that it has a minimal footprint to load and execute, and Rust’s robust type system will help us maintain it more efficiently than dynamically typed code. A language that is fundamentally designed for multi-threading will also make it easier to exploit parallelism whenever the need arises, whereas JavaScript’s single-threaded nature makes parallelism awkward and challenging.
It seems like experienced people around atom see benefit of compiled language designed for parallelism!
1 Like
What’s that a quote from?
Isn’t VS currently built on the same JS Electron platform that Atom is?
The quote is from the earlier pay about x-ray:
https://github.com/atom/xray/blob/master/docs/updates/2018_05_28.md
Anyway, Microsoft sells software and services to make money. When it comes to things aiming at end users, like office or LinkedIn, they have to generate a profit.
If everything ultimately had to justify themselves based on how they effect the bottom line, GitHub isn’t like LinkedIn, Windows, or MS Office, but more like VSCode.
User facing software has to bring in money, meaning either that software or the users of it must be the product.
Projects like VSCode, llvm, etc don’t justify their existence to shareholders in that way, but in being essential too efficient business operation.
Now, if you look at this slideshow
https://edge.media-server.com/m6/p/eudfciq3
They do mention a GitHub marketplace, but that doesn’t have to be how GitHub had to justify itself. It’s users, including its largest – MS – have a vested interest in GitHub’s health.
The slides also mention increased GitHub-VSCode integration.
With changes there’re always risks. Despite Microsoft’s reputation, I’m not too worried at the moment.
Worst case, we jump ship. For projects that already had lots of collaboration, open issues, etc, that could be rough.
If much of the community moves to GitLab or some other service, I’ll definitely follow. I’ll look a little more in to GitLab…
1 Like
Well,
10 years ago, I would have said that only windows machines would be able to commit to Github 
However, Microsoft has changed a lot… I really think this will bring good things!
1 Like
We have a private gitlab server running for our projects. It works, has a lot of features, but I personally thinks that Github is better.
1 Like
FWIW, the Azure Data Science Virtual Machine has Julia installed: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/machine-learning/data-science-virtual-machine/dsvm-languages#julia
3 Likes
Well, gitlab also use Azure. If there is anyone escaping MS, then you might be disappointed.
Besides, it would be easy to migrate your repo to other place, but it would be hard to preserve connections established on Github. We should wait and see what will happen. At least at the moment, I don’t see things will turns to be bad, and maybe because github got more money, it becomes better. We can always find something else if Github is not favored.
BTW is there will to sell Julia (computing) to some similar “evil” corporation?
1 Like
A very thoughtful and quite positive analysis of Microsoft’s Github purchase was posted today at Ars Technica.
5 Likes
I don’t know if this adds much to the debate 👋 Hello, GitHub | @natfriedman
1 Like
Quote from the Atom community manager:
Just to let everyone know, I’ve been given assurances that Atom remains key to GitHub. Our product roadmap is set and the team will continue all of their work.
We’ll see how that pans out, I guess.
Some kind of convergence seems likely, but that was the case before the acquisition too.
Regarding xray: The two main devs of that are/were also Atom devs, so there’s some hope development will continue there.
1 Like