Not a commitment for your OS (whatever that might be), but a comment of rather seeing it opensourced than abandoned was made by jps
Sublime's future and open source
Iād like to see him state clearly that in the event Sublime Text is no longer sold commercially, it will be open sourced. I fully approve of jpsā interest in making money from the software, and I think making such a promise would not damage the business potential, but increase it.
Itās funny how people think that an open source project will have success and how this will affect your decision to buy it.
Just think about e-text, how it was open sourced like an year before the author suddenly decided to go silenzio stampa and how the development was very active!
[quote=āiamntzā]Itās funny how people think that an open source project will have success and how this will affect your decision to buy it.
Just think about e-text, how it was open sourced like an year before the author suddenly decided to go silenzio stampa and how the development was very active![/quote]
Thatās exactly what I was going to say!
Also, textmate is only very active right now because at least 95% of the current changes are being made by his creator (Allan Odgaard), even though it is now open source.
I doubt sublime would go far without Jon.
Iām not saying that an open source project will automatically or perhaps even likely have success. Many donāt. Open source is far from a magic bullet.
What open source does more or less ensure, however, is that itās possible to keep using the software in new versions of operating systems. Itās usually little effort to fix the application such that it compiles on new versions of the operating system libraries. If an open source application is at all popular, someone is very likely to maintain it at least to the degree of making it work in current versions of relevant platforms.
Thatās all I want: confidence that Iāll be able to keep using Sublime Text several years past the time its commercial development ends, were that to one day happen. I believe thatās also Tackās interest.
Yeah, thatās exactly it. When I think about my current workflow, which involves vim and a bunch of tiled terminals, this is how Iāve worked for the past 15 years. I have a tremendous muscle-memory investment. Now ST2 has some pretty awesome functionality (including and especially Goto Anything) thatās really luring me away from my tried-and-true terms+vim setup.
But if Iām taking the plunge seriously, which requires easily months worth of retraining and unlearning previous habits (like no replace mode in Vintage mode? Arggh!) and doing that makes me more productive, thereās no reason to think ST2 couldnāt be the foundation of my workflow for the next 15 years.
So when weāre talking about 10-15 years in the future, a closed source, single developer project really is a legitimate concern. Iām surprised by the dismissive attitude on this thread so far. Clearly these users change editors more easily than I do.
Iām not saying that this is a solution for your problem but the Vintage mode is open source and if youāre missing some feature from vim you can always help: github.com/sublimehq/Vintage
Even though I love sublime and I would hate to see it die, I can always go back to VIM.
Oh yeah, attempt to hack my own replace mode was the first thing I did.
Unfortunately I failed because although I can toggle overwrite mode from a plugin, I couldnāt find a way to set it specifically on or off, or detect what the current overwrite mode was. As a result, even the existing insert mode is broken, because it retains the overwrite setting between toggling from command mode and insert mode. (From command mode, hit i to enter insert mode, hit the insert key to toggle overwrite, hit escape to go back to command mode, then hit i again. Youāre still overwriting text.)
I couldnāt find anything in the plugin documentation to help me get further. Iād intended to start a separate thread about it. More to the point (of this thread), although Vintage mode is OSS, because the core isnāt, my efforts were derailed in short order.
[quote=āgrowdigitalā]
TextMate 2 is open source (but you do need a mac!!)[/quote]
And Notepad++ is Windows only. I use Linux.
But anyway, all that is really beside the point. Iām pretty sure S0und didnāt bother to read my post.
Sublime Text is great I love it, so imagine what it would if it were open source, I hope someday release the code.
For those looking for a free alternative foicica.com/textadept/
Sorry for my bad english.
I would gladly pay for sublime even if it is open source and fund its development. Iām pretty sure there is a lot of people who would support sublime if is open source. I this has cost sublime fair share of user base who just jumped to vscode ( soon it may catchup with sublime speed). Which is bulding features that thanks to its open source contributors.Please forgive me if I do sound rude. I guess I could have rephrased it more pleasant. But I do not know the implications of making it open source now since Vsode seems to be gaining upper hand.
Problem with āalternativesā like foicica.com/textadept/ that are written on top of the good old Scintilla is one (IMHO)ā¦ the Scintillaās implementation of multiple selections is currently incomplete and corky in comparison to STāsā¦ if this was properly fixed Iād gladly callopen-source editors written on top of Scintilla good alternatives to Sublime for sure.
For more info about what I mean check this ancient issue https://sourceforge.net/p/scintilla/bugs/1224/.
Itās not just the fact undo/redo history of multi selections doesnāt workā¦ itās also the fact youāll be forced to have a āmainā selection always present in Scintillaā¦ while in Sublime a multiple selection can become an empty list.
Summing up, Sublime implemented the multi selections feature the right way from the very beginning and Scintilla, the main āalternativeā to ST has implemented this āmustā feature years later to its creation and the author didnāt put enough love into it so the result still needs to be improved to become the real deal
That said, if Scintilla fixed that properly Iād strongly believe it could become a serious contender to SublimeTextā¦ you mention VsCode, Atom or other slow competitors. Personally, I wonāt even bother to waste my time testing out these electron things as the very foundation is just wrong (sorry to be blunt here)
Most of the development on VSCode is made by full-time developers paid by Microsoft. Open sourcing Sublime Text wouldnāt be enough to keep the pace without a significant cash flow on the project.
True as I said even if it is open source there might still be full time devs working on project funded by the community.
Yes, it is possibile, but full-time developers cost a lot of money, and it is extremely hard for a community to collect a significant amount of cash because it is based on voluntary donations. There are very few open-source projects funded properly and with continuity this way.
Also, I have no numbers but Iām pretty sure that the current business model of Sublime Textās authors collects more money (thus funding the project) that it would get if it were open-source; there are certainly thousands of professionals to whom 80$ is a negligible price for the no. 1 tool they use for their daily job (Iām one of them). These people use ST and buy the license because it is a different product from Atom or VSCode, otherwise they just would use use Atom or VSCode and save some money. These design differences are the cause of a lot of critisism (ā¦ VSCode does this and that, ST doesnāt) but are what most of the license payers are looking for. My opinion, obviously.
I think this would happen if Sublime Text would became open-source:
- the community start requesting/submitting patches to include in ST any kind of feature, trying to turn it in a VSCode/Atom clone;
- if the project maintainers resist, the community gets angry and forks the project; consequently, any cash flow get splitted and any cash funds will likely became insufficient;
- if the project maintainers give up trying to keep ST something different, the professionals who love the current ST will stop giving money and move to something else, and ST is years behind VSCore/Atom when trying to directly compete with them. The project dies.
Moreover, if the community is able to pay full-time developers it doesnāt need Sublime Textās source code: just start paying some high experienced developer to build a new open-source editor or some high experienced developer could start the project with the confidence of being funded by the community. This isnāt going to happen because both ways are extremely hard.
Just my 2c.
I totally agree with you here, open sourcing ST would be most probably a dead-end, if you read carefully about the available options here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_models_for_open-source_software youāll soon realize there isnāt any low-risk choice that would be a proper alternative to the current business model ST usesā¦
I think the only choice of Sublime going open-source would be:
- SublimeHQ is bought by a whale company and such company decides to open-source it
- New proper open-source competitors to SublimeText emerges and the whole user-base transition to it, SublimeText goes abandonware and the source is opened by force
Iām not sure the odds for such events to happen are very high
With due respect to TextMate, I was a TextMate user after graduating from BBEdit. We were stuck at 1.5 for so long that once ST came and it had taken all the good ideas and more, I switched to ST in a heart beat.
May Jon and the team have a long life. Now I am comparing SM with SourceTree and I can see myself committing to SM, yeah including the Dark Mode.