Hacker News Reader

The key difference between the two situation is, that the vs code team does it juicy features as a secret project. Dotnet watch was developed, tested and licensed in the public and stripped out last second.

VS Code behavior you can accept as a open core or commercial plugin thing. The other thing was just a theft.

View on HN

I want to extend in this a bit: Scott, Damian, Scott, David, Rich, Immo ... If you read this: fight for a clear ahead of time separation of commercial and non commercial features. Many of us can understand that Microsoft still sells dev tools but we do not like bad communication and stuff taking away which have been there already (at the same time we also think that .NET can only become truly awesome when free tools exists ... because für your competition these exists).

The reason why I feel somewhat encouraged is because my understanding is that this exact group of people fighting to keep this in is why it was reverted. I have no idea who knew what when or how anyone would have reacted without public scrutiny but David Fowler has been hyping hot reload since at least May on Twitter and it seems obvious to me that he and many other team members were 100% behind the planned dotnet watch hot reload approach. Maybe public outcry gave them the ammunition to fight this fight, and I may be naive, but I have a hard time thinking that at least some of that group wasn’t against this decision from the beginning (though who knows if they even learned about it much in advance of it being public).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com