If I needed a one-time “use it and lose it” attack vector, this would be an excellent way to provide one. Imagine how many thousands of code repositories I could _successfully_ inject a backdoor into, using only a repackaged “without the telemetry” version of Microsoft’s code. Y’all are far too trusting.<p>Edit: The point is that we all have a blind spot around risk assessment and threat evaluation when it comes to certain software topics, such as code editors and terminal software.
Thanks for doing this. This will be the canary that tells us whether Microsoft is really changed like they claim. Since they call themselves "in love with open source" [1] and letting Github "remain an open platform" [2], I expect them to not remove this project from Github. If they do remove it, whatever reason they give about wanting to provide the best possible VSCode experience is bullshit and Github will no longer be a home for open-source projects.<p>[1] <a href="https://info.microsoft.com/rs/157-GQE-382/images/Microsoft-loves-Linux.pdf" rel="nofollow">https://info.microsoft.com/rs/157-GQE-382/images/Microsoft-l...</a>
[2] <a href="https://open.microsoft.com/2018/06/07/github-acquisition-microsoft-commitment-open-source-developers/" rel="nofollow">https://open.microsoft.com/2018/06/07/github-acquisition-mic...</a>
I appreciate this effort and am not suggesting it's not necessary. Just curious: are there any known ill-desired effects of the MS binaries? My understanding is that it's just branding and telemetry that can be turned off.
I don't see the beneficial element to this project. Visual Studio Code is opensource, free of charge and used by millions at this point, why would anyone want another license just because of the license alone?
This just creates more problems than it solves. If you don't like Microsoft's approach to VS Code you're better off choosing another editor to use - there are lots to choose from.