sdk VS MQTTnet

I opened an issue since I couldn't find docs that indicate what they were working on to improve the start time, and they replied:

https://github.com/dotnet/sdk/issues/49197

It's not about being "cool"

It's about the motives

"it's open source"

"it now works on linux"

it all doesn't matter if they'll go after your ass if you dare build tooling with their debugger (jetbrains)

of when they want to remove a feature overnight to make it exclusive to visual studio windows

https://github.com/dotnet/sdk/issues/22247

it's this kind of things that makes it hard to recommend to people, and Microsoft can't be trusted

I hate to defend telemetry of all things but in this particular case the criticism is unfounded and lacks context:

https://dotnet.microsoft.com/en-us/platform/telemetry

https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/core/tools/telemetr...

https://github.com/dotnet/sdk/tree/main/src/Cli/dotnet/Telem...

In any case, Debian would use https://github.com/dotnet/source-build and dotnet/dotnet, and could easily include the argument or a patch for this. It’s unlikely to be an issue. My bet it was not in Debian because there was no one to take initiative or there was but that person has faced a backlash by people in Debian who are similar to vocal minority here that posts FUD because of their little personal crusade.

FWIW telemetry can be easily opted-out, which the SDK explicitly tells you about, and there is a page that has full list of the kind of data that is collected (usage metrics and tooling crash stack traces). You can also review the metrics yourself.

About: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/core/tools/telemetr...

Collected statistics: https://dotnet.microsoft.com/en-us/platform/telemetry

Source code: https://github.com/dotnet/sdk/tree/main/src/Cli/dotnet/Telem...

In either case, many CIs simply have 'DOTNET_CLI_TELEMETRY_OPTOUT=' and call it a day.

They used to gather all command line arguments until they later decided that (oops!) it's "not acceptable per our privacy policies"[0] and they really shouldn't have been doing that. They have also had issues with anonymization not being implemented properly, the opt-out mechanism not working in some edge cases, forgetting to even tell users about the need to opt out, and who knows what else.

Also, monetary value is not the only reason you might want to keep information private.

[0] https://github.com/dotnet/sdk/issues/6145#issuecomment-22010...

[DllImport("libc")] private static extern uint geteuid(); public bool IsCurrentProcessElevated() { if (RuntimeInformation.IsOSPlatform(OSPlatform.Windows)) { // https://github.com/dotnet/sdk/blob/v6.0.100/src/Cli/dotnet/Installer/Windows/WindowsUtils.cs#L38 using var identity = WindowsIdentity.GetCurrent(); var principal = new WindowsPrincipal(identity); return principal.IsInRole(WindowsBuiltInRole.Administrator); } // https://github.com/dotnet/maintenance-packages/blob/62823150914410d43a3fd9de246d882f2a21d5ef/src/Common/tests/TestUtilities/System/PlatformDetection.Unix.cs#L58 // 0 is the ID of the root user return geteuid() == 0; }

> There's definitely things they tried to improve on that... weren't really improvements. The way "assemblies" are matched in .NET is much more sophisticated- the goal there was to try to kill DLL hell. It evolved into the Global Assembly Cache, which is sort of the Windows Registry of DLLs. Not a huge fan of those bits.

The Global Assembly Cache did not make the jump to the modern .NET (Core). There was the thing called `dotnet store`, but it’s broken since .NET 6: https://github.com/dotnet/sdk/issues/24752

The assembly redirection hell has also been greatly reduced there.

I do the same.

I have a small write-up here: https://chrlschn.dev/blog/2023/10/end-to-end-type-safety-wit...

You get end-to-end type safety (even better once you connect it to EF Core since you get it all ways to your DB).

With this setup with hot-reload (currently broken in .NET 8 [0]), productivity is really, really good. Like tRPC but with one of the most powerful ORMs out there right now.

[0] https://github.com/dotnet/sdk/issues/36918

Noticed an open issue just now.

You're thinking of https://github.com/dotnet/sdk/issues/22247

MQTTnet is a high-performance .Net library that implements the MQTT protocol. It is open source on GitHub and has a rich set of features, including MQTT 5.0 protocol and TLS/SSL supports.

MQTT https://github.com/dotnet/MQTTnet

MQTTNet - High perf IOT comms for .NET - https://github.com/dotnet/MQTTnet

I'm trying to use MQTT.Net and so far everything works.. except for event handling.

Like the other guy said it depends on the requirements, but you could implement your own mqtt server with MQTTnet with a few lines of code

For the server we used mosquitto because we already used it in the past (and it's relatively simple), for the client MQTTnet because it's .net and it seemed good enough (mosquitto has a client library too but it's C so I'd have to write some interop). It's a simple protocol so it shouldn't really matter which implementation you use.

We are going to use MQTTNet as the foundation for this article, although the same concepts can be applied with any other MQTT client.

[2] https://github.com/dotnet/MQTTnet