[grey4228]

Nope it's not open source. It's right there in the link you posted:

"This repository is for providing feedback and documentation on the Pylance language server extension in Visual Studio Code. You can use the repository to report issues or submit feature requests. The Pylance codebase is not open-source but you can contribute to Pyright to make improvements to the core typing engine that powers the Pylance experience."

More info: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25719338

Edit: Info about the proprietary VSCode remote extensions: https://github.com/VSCodium/vscodium/issues/240

Edit 2: Microsoft history repeats:

"In discussing ways of competing with open source, Document I suggests that one reason that open source projects had been able to enter the server market is the market's use of standardized protocols. The document then suggests that this can be stopped by "extending these protocols and developing new protocols" and "de-commoditiz[ing] protocols & applications". This policy has been internally nicknamed "embrace, extend, extinguish". Document I also suggests that open source software "is long-term credible ... FUD tactics can not be used to combat it", and "Recent case studies (the Internet) provide very dramatic evidence ... that commercial quality can be achieved / exceeded by OSS projects."

Documents I and II were filed as evidence on January 16, 2007, in the case of Comes v. Microsoft."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halloween_documents

[oblio]

1. The LSP protocol was created by Microsoft.

2. They are allowed to have proprietary implementations of this protocol (let alone the fact that they created and opened up this protocol, so you could say it's their protocol).

Are they doing anything to close down the actual protocol?

[grey4228]

Yeah they created it. VS Code is touted as open source. But the thing is it comes with gotchas like the above 2 extensions. It's similar in spirit to the news about the pfSense project that recently got attention on HN. PfSense toutes it is open source, only later we realise we cannot compile from source. And now they are kinda abandoning their open software, all the while not being open about it to users.

The VSCodium folks drank the MS kool-aid and only later realised that the remote extensions are blocked. Now it's pylance, which will be THE python LSP for VSCode. This creates a lock-in effect. People who would have easily moved to VSCodium (which is VSCode minus telemetry) would stay with VSCode. And who knows what bit they would lock down next.

This is against the spirit of open source. Emacs or Vim would never do it, all the little Unix tools would never do it.

At least be honest like 'Sublime Text' or the Jetbrains IDEs. They have excellent software without the gotchas. They are upfront about what you are gonna get. Kudos to them.

[oblio]

The IntelliJ CE is open source. It's the exact same model.

[grey4228]

As I said, they are very upfront about what you're gonna get [1]. The table shows the difference between paid and open source versions.

[1] https://www.jetbrains.com/idea

With VSCode, it's not obvious. Whenever it comes up in HN, we feel it's open source. When one goes to it's github, one feels it's MIT licensed. That's why there are at least 3 issues in the VSCodium github asking why remote extensions are not working. It's like the excerpt from the 'Halloween documents' I commented above.

[oblio]

I know the Halloween documents, I've read them a bunch of times.

I don't think this is equivalent. It's their prerogative to not offer everything for free and/or make everything Open Source.

If they start banning Open Source extensions that do the exact same thing as their stuff, now that would be EEE.

Or if they change stuff in the platform to intentionally break Open Source extensions that compete with their extensions, that would also be EEE.

So far, there's no indication of that. This is just speculation.