Difference to OpenVSCode Server

[kaaax0815]

Gitpod now created its own version of VSCode in the Browser with huge backers
https://www.gitpod.io/blog/openvscode-server-launch
https://github.com/gitpod-io/openvscode-server/

Are code-server and OpenVSCode Server now rivals?

Are the key differences?

Is this project now "absolute" because they have more money

[AyaanZaveri]

I was wondering the same thing!

[im-coder-lg]

Nah, code-server isn't a Docker image, although Docker images for code-server exist. Vanilla Code Server is actually an optimised server, but Code Web Server isn't. Moreover, I'd prefer code-server since Gitpod's VS Code Web Server doesn't allow me and @AyaanZaveri the sudo command.

[woshiniming007]

Will this project be dead?

[im-coder-lg]

I don't think so, since code-server is used on Coder(dev workspaces) but I don't think code-server will be dead. I think for collaborating with multiple people simultaneously, Open VS Code is best but for individuals, code-server is recommended since it has protection.

[GirlBossRush]

How does Coder’s code-server differ from GitPod’s OpenVSCode Server?

This is a great question, and quite a few people have wanted to know after GitPod’s recent announcement. At their core, both projects extend Microsoft’s open-source VS Code. However, the GitPod team describes their project as attempting to apply a minimal set of changes, as per their readme:

VS Code has traditionally been a desktop IDE built with web technologies. A few years back, people started patching it in order to run it in a remote context and to make it accessible through web browsers. These efforts have been complex and error prone, because many changes had to be made across the large code base of VS Code.

Luckily, in 2019 the VS Code team started to refactor its architecture to support a browser-based working mode. While this architecture has been adopted by Gitpod and GitHub, the important bits have not been open-sourced, until now. As a result, many people in the community still use the old, hard to maintain and error-prone approach.

At Gitpod, we've been asked a lot about how we do it. So we thought we might as well share the minimal set of changes needed so people can rely on the latest version of VS Code, have a straightforward upgrade path and low maintenance effort.

Personally, I find their recounting of the project’s history to be a bit misleading. I suppose it’s accurate to say that Gitpod first started with a fork of Microsoft’s repo, while we initially went with a submodule approach. Or that they’re going for a “minimal” set of changes, which I believe is technically true if we're comparing line counts across our respective projects.

But what I find especially…interesting, is how their phrasing promotes "OpenVSCode Server" as if they're thought-leaders in this situation, and that they’ve decided to graciously share their approach over the "old, hard to maintain and error-prone.”

Gitpod’s messaging has changed over the past week as well, first by linking their readme to an issue I wrote regarding a refactor of code-server, albeit in a misleading light. That link has since been removed. One might think that by reading Gitpod’s announcement first, they were actually the team who guided both us and the greater open-source community, toward a better architecture.

But...if you happened to catch that our refactor began well before Gitpod’s announcement, you might get the impression that they’re trying to reframe these events to Gitpod’s apocryphal advantage. Personally, I was frustrated to see their project launch under what I believe is attempt to redirect the public discourse as code-server being old, hard to maintain and error-prone. Ironic given the fact that I was busy this week with a major refactor to our server implementation, but I suppose anything worth anything is worth fighting for...

Lastly, I was also surprised at their project name, "OpenVSCode Server”, which in my opinion, not only draws comparison to Microsoft’s trademark, but also adds confusion to our existing project. Ultimately, code-server is MIT licensed and everyone’s free to copy with attribution. And while I can’t say for certain, there are parts of Gitpod’s project that look similar enough to give me déjà vu, even beyond the commonalities of two projects targeting an API and linter defined by Microsoft upstream. Honestly, I wouldn’t mind our projects aligning so much if I didn’t get such a strange territorial vibe from their team, but I hope that this is all just a small part of a larger misunderstanding.

I suppose all I’m looking for is an upfront acknowledgment of the great work put in by both myself, the engineers at Coder, and all you wonderful people.

Anyway…that’s a lot of words to still not answer the question, "What’s the difference between these projects?”

Well, this is our approach to building code-server:

• Add the server functionality not included in Microsoft’s open-source offerings in such a way that it conforms to their project guidelines, making it easier for us to keep up with version changes.
• Retain a high degree of understanding in upstream’s architectural designs so that we can build features faster and with fewer issues.
• Implement extra features the community frequently asks for, such as TLS via Coder Link, and an open-source replacement for Settings Sync.
• Eventually, offer our changes back upstream as pull requests, minimizing the differences between our fork and mainstream releases.

Thank you all again for reading my very long reply. I think this is about as close to the right answer I can give for now, but if this doesn’t suffice, I hope the upcoming releases of code-server will say enough.

~Teffen

[code-asher]

PRs are always welcome but there are no plans from our end to work on settings sync at the moment.

[enzofrnt]

Why you mark soon in your FAQ ? Strange. Delete it.
That will be very nice to have it.. to have same parameter as our own VS Code client

[code-asher]

Good catch, I will edit that.

[enzofrnt]

Thanks… so no work about it in few days, month ?
Looks like a lot of people are hope to have and use this functionality.. :)

[code-asher]

I think it is unlikely we would add our own version of settings sync. I believe there are some extensions that offer syncing which can be used instead.

The ideal solution would be that Microsoft would allow open source versions of VS Code to use settings sync but they seem pretty against that idea microsoft/vscode#110668

[SlavikCA]

Here is my summary of differences:

• code-server support auth (protect the editor with password) while OpenVSCode doesn't
• OpenVSCode installs extensions from open-vsx, while code-server is in the process of switching to open-vsx
• TAB is working in the code-server's terminal. Doesn't work in the OpenVSCode. This difference may seem small, but significant to my day-to-day use
• I figured how code-server handles user account in Docker, but haven't figure out yet how OpenVSCode does it in the Docker

[mirekphd]

One little known gotcha is that OpenVSCode does not let you pre-install extensions in a non-interactive mode (e.g. during docker build to ship after security scanning for use on air-gapped servers). The gotcha is documented e.g. here. A bit of a blocker IMO given how much of this IDE functionality is in those extensions...

[spkane]

One little known gotcha is that OpenVSCode does not let you pre-install extensions in a non-interactive mode (e.g. during docker build to ship after security scanning for use on air-gapped servers). The gotcha is documented e.g. here. A bit of a blocker IMO given how much of this IDE functionality is in those extensions...

This does not appear to be the case anymore.

https://github.com/gitpod-io/openvscode-server#pre-installing-vscode-extensions

[benz0li]

@spkane Installing from a VSIX is not the same as installing from the Open VSX Registry.

[spkane]

@spkane Installing from a VSIX is not the same as installing from the Open VSX Registry.

True @benz0li, but if you carefully look at that script, you will see that it is set up to install both raw .vsix files in addition to entries from the Open VSX registry. I did this earlier today and it works just fine for installing from the registry.

[benz0li]

@spkane Right. I missed that.