Availability in the other marketplace

[roberestarkk]

G'Day Guys,

Would you mind also publishing to https://open-vsx.org/ as mentioned over here: https://github.com/VSCodium/vscodium/blob/master/DOCS.md#extensions--marketplace
That would allow people to also use VSCodium with the addon if they wanted to.

Cheers.

[mcmonkey4eva]

Relevant Discord discussion of the same topic:

---

TLDR there's not a clear way to do that specifically due to the extension's dependency on Microsoft .NET 6.

.NET is open source so it would stand to reason that there might be an open source dotnet distribution available via that same alternate marketplace, which if so please direct me towards it.

ps if you're not in the Discord already, you really should be @ https://discord.gg/Q6pZGSR

[roberestarkk]

You may be able to hook into this: https://open-vsx.org/extension/ms-dotnettools/vscode-dotnet-runtime

But I just installed it manually via the visx file from the regular marketplace, and it all seems to be working fine (though I can't directly compare it with VSCode since I don't have that installed, and I'm pretty new to everything so I don't know what might be missing...), and I don't remember installing .net 6 myself, though it could've been something else or I might not've hit the part that requires it yet...?
Then again, perhaps it'll #justWorkLikeToddHowardSaid ?

[mcmonkey4eva]

It feels a bit redundant to have a non-MS version of VS Code, connected to a non-MS extension marketplace... to then use an unofficial redistribution of what appears to be the actual official Microsoft .NET toolkit to install the MS version of .NET 6 0.o

In other words: at the point you're happy installing all of that Microsoft software, why bother with the non-MS fork of VS Code at all?

[roberestarkk]

There's also this as an option: dotnet/vscode-csharp#3401 (comment)
Though not sure entirely how useful it'd be in this context.

It feels a bit redundant to have a non-MS version of VS Code, connected to a non-MS extension marketplace... to then use an unofficial redistribution of what appears to be the actual official Microsoft .NET toolkit to install the MS version of .NET 6 0.o

Perhaps, but redundancies are designed into all sorts of things for all sorts of reasons, a lot of the time it's on purpose too.

In other words: at the point you're happy installing all of that Microsoft software, why bother with the non-MS fork of VS Code at all?

It might help to think of it as more a step in a process, than an end result.

Sure right now there are some parts of the pipeline that can't be replaced with an open alternative, and some of those parts might be entirely closed and could be doing all sorts of shenanigans in the background.
But that's no reason not to try.
If we don't try, we'll never get to the point where they can be replaced by something more open and inherently trustable.
And in the meantime, we can still benefit from the redundancy availability of those parts that can be replaced and do have an alternative.

I'm not opposed to Microsoft authoring software... Or anyone else for that matter.
I'm opposed to them sticking a bunch of closed source shenanigans into releases of software they are 'proudly open sourcing', and feature-locking things to those closed proprietary features, and all that sort of behaviour that discourages co-operative enhancement of our tools and softwares and whatsits.

Is open-sourcing the 'core' of a thing, only to then continue adding a bunch of neat stuff on top that isn't open and so incentivising people to stick with and begin to rely upon the 'technically open but really closed' version, really that different to the old 'Embrace, Extend, Extinguish'? Feels like 'Open, Extend, De-facto-Extinguish-all-else' to me...

The more we push for open source software and open protocols and workable/interchangable alternatives to things, the less likely we are to be gradually encircled and trapped in a corporate hellscape of monopoly after monopoly at every level of software we use...

Plus, on a more personal/specific level, I find it easier to maintain a healthy separation between work and home, in this WFH era, by using different editors for each.
I use VSCode for work because my work uses a heavily Microsoft stack, and it's much more important to me earning a livable wage for all of that to #justWork out of the box, than it is for the Denizen extension to do so.
Especially when everything else I personally use regularly is already on the open marketplace anyway.

At the end of the day, all I can do is ask for the extension to be published to the open alternative marketplace, so other people using other compatible editors for whatever their reasons can benefit from the extension existing, in a way that is both legal and convenient.

If y'all just don't want to, that's absolutely, totally fine by the way.
I'm not trying to force you or guilt you or anything like that, and I am 100% down with the attitude of "That sounds like a lot of work and I don't want to". It's great and it saves me personally a lot of unnecessary hassle to push back just a little and go "Do you really want this though? REALLY?", so I absolutely get it.

I just think it'd be nice, handy, and 'proper' if it was published by the actual author, somewhere the actual author can control updates and whatnot, to have it be more widely accessible.
There are other options to getting it working, we can request that a bot republish it unofficially, and even install it manually into the editor (as I found by doing just that to see if it worked and/or could grab it's dependencies automagically without having to fiddle with it), so it's not the end of the world if you aren't the ones doing it...
They're just less... ideal.
So I figured I'd ask first, since I didn't see a record here of anyone else asking.

I should join the Discord, and probably will if I ever get into writing scripts, but I'm still just getting started, and not being able to install it in 'my' editor of choice in the 'standard' way, is an obstacle to actually starting.
I don't expect y'all to support each and every editor under the sun of course, but it felt like a relatively small ask to support the ones that are directly compatible with the existing extension already, by just publishing it to one other place.
So I did, and here we are.

Either I'm talking sense you agree with (or at least can understand how it'd be agreeable to others), or I'm talking nonsense and you don't agree at all.
Either way, all good, and thanks for you time thus far :)