[TuringTest]

> I too quit playing catch up with MS no code stuff - they change so much

That might be different this time, though. Afaik it's the first time Microsoft releases a user-friendly reactive language as open source; all their previous tools in this field have been strictly proprietary.

Being open source, it can be maintained by its community of users without becoming abandoned, even if Microsoft loses interest in it.

[mathnmusic]

Open source != Open governance. Consider Signal as an example. It's open-source but there's no developer "community".

[coldtea]

That's probably for the better.

It has the benefits of the open source (you can inspect, and modify the code, exists forever, etc), without the downsides (design by commitee - sorry, community -, endless bikeshedding, code churn for the sake of it).

[patmorgan23]

This will probably have developer community around it. Given that any one that builds on the platform will be invested in maintaining it and the users will be somewhat technical and the businesses that adopt it will probably put some staff time towards it.

[2Gkashmiri]

SOURCE OPEN. sigh

[Chris2048]

What does this mean?

[2Gkashmiri]

source open is different from "open source". look but don't touch

[TuringTest]

This is released under MIT license, though. That's open source.