Hacker News Reader

Comment by hoschicz | Hacker News Reader

I find bundling Git support with Atom is a requirement, VSCode does it.

Git support is different than a Github bundle. Github is different than Git.

But atom is made by github, right? Not to justify their choice but you can see from a company perspective how it surely aligns with their goals (increase github market share).

I wonder what the market share is and if they're actively seeking it at this point.

I wouldn't say that they necessarily want to increase their market share at this point (but that may have been the original intent). Now it is probably more about retaining as many users as possible by offering more or more convenient services than their competitors.

Of course, VSCode also supports TFS, Perforce, and Mercurial via extensions:

https://marketplace.visualstudio.com/search?target=VSCode&ca... Providers

There are community-provided atom packages for all/most of the providers you listed. The point isn't one editor versus another. The point is that Atom should remain plausibly neutral about Github (which is separate from Git or Mercurial or whatever).

An analogy would be if VSCode shipped with a fancy CodePlex dashboard by default (I know CodePlex is dead). There's an obvious incentive for them to pick sides but it's not in the best interest of the people using the editor nor the editor itself.

> An analogy would be if VSCode shipped with a fancy CodePlex dashboard by default

Or, for example, a "Deploy to Azure" button...

It would be quite fine as a plugin. I'm using fossil for instance so care little about git integration. Atom is already bloated and slow as it is, but then again it's their call to bundle whatever they want because I'm not going to use it anyway.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com