question: Is this still under development?

[attilah]

** Question **

1. Is this still under active development?

Last release was 10 months ago.

2. Do you plan to open source this component?

[stale]

This issue has been automatically marked as type:bug-p3 because it has not had recent activity.

[randi274]

Hi @attilah - the LWC Dev Server hasn't been one of our active development products for a bit, but it is still something we intend to continue working on, and have been discussing internally. We do not have plans to open source it at this time. Are there specific features you're hoping to see us deliver?

[stale]

This issue has been automatically marked as type:bug-p3 because it has not had recent activity.

[olegsid]

Hi @randi274, it will be great if you fix bugs at lest. There are a lot of open issues here, but seems like no one care about them.

[adamondrejka]

Hi, any chance to open source it? Dev server was awesome but it is starting to be slowly useless with new incompatible features (hook styles, confirm, prompts, ...)

[attilah]

@randi274 the features we were looking for is almost identical what it already has but updated releases, and some enhancements. First of all we have 2 separate scenarios for LWC on platform and off platform, this tool was aimed for on platform development which is important.

Feature list:

• Support the same components that the platform supports
• Support the same SLDS tokens, stay in par with SF release api versions
• Enable quick iteration for component development by modern frontend development features, hot reload and such
• Support component libraries (LWC components from other packages, multiple source roots, outside of the current package's directory, which just consumes the component library, think of it as 2 managed packages)
• Support session token to enable the same tooling api usage as it would happen from on platform
• Apex invocation (already supported)
• Community code invocation (already supported)

I think doing this would not be a big lift as everything is already there and however the dependency packages are not released as OSS they are still licensed under MIT, so it would be nice if you could even just provide it as not supported OSS release, I'm sure the community could lift it up, instead of have nothing or have 101 different in-house workarounds in every ISV shop.

[stale]

This issue has been automatically marked as type:bug-p3 because it has not had recent activity.

[attilah]

Can we get some response @randi274 ? (even if it will not be done)

[Szandor72]

I am working on getting more attention on this matter. Dreamforce helped a bit, I think.

Thanks for being patient, kind, and persistent @attilah

[stale]

This issue has been automatically marked as type:bug-p3 because it has not had recent activity.

[SCWells72]

I'm curious about this as well. When the feature was first announced in October 2019 there was some momentum, though after a couple of months I didn't really hear about it again until during/after Dreamforce 2022 where it was used in several of the demos. That seemed to be the first time many folks had heard about it, and as a result I started getting pinged about support in IC2 (which does already work, though it requires some manual steps).

If this is going to be continued--or even better, open sourced--I'd like to revisit a discussion I had with the team two years ago to allow the View in VS Code link to be configurable such that other tools can be integrated, e.g., View in Illuminated Cloud which would just use the JetBrains IDEs' ability to have files opened by external tools.

@Szandor72, I'll be very curious to hear what you find. I may reach out to Salesforce myself to get a better feel for where this is going before I invest in a first-class integration.

[AnanyaJha]

Hi all - thank you so much for the renewed interest in this plugin! Unfortunately, our team will not be making any updates to this project this year, but we will be revisiting this next year. We're aware that this product has not been updated in quite sometime and will be evaluating its usage and the desired features before investing in it further next year. We've had some internal changes that have limited bandwidth for the year, so I appreciate everybody's patience on this.

In the meantime, please feel free to continue to post feedback - #143. We'll take this into account as we plan for the upcoming year.

[stale]

This issue has been automatically marked as type:bug-p3 because it has not had recent activity.