What's surprising to me about all the negative reactions Microsoft receives, especially on here, is that from my point of view, they are currently the most open out of all the big companies (Google, Facebook, Apple, etc). I cannot remember a time Apple has admitted to anything or made any effort to have anything that could be considered open, but they do no wrong in most people's eyes, where even a simple mistake by…
Microsoft forked MIT licensed repo and changed the copyright [fixed]
461–470 of 626 posts
Re: Microsoft forked MIT licensed repo and changed the copyright [fixed]
#462Earlier quoted context omitted.
All the code designed and built by Apple is thrown-over-the-wall. That's old-version-of-source-available, barely open source. I tried emailing ld64's author about a bug in the past without success. I don't remember how I found their name/address back then, but I sure can't find any names or contact information for dyld right now...
What on earth are you talking about? ld64 is a completely different beast than dyld in today's world. Also, I'm not sure looking for individual points of contact in a large org is the best idea. I emailed security@apple.com. Even if it's not a security bug they will help direct you to the right team. Again, have you even tried?
I'm talking about trying to contact people at Apple about bugs in their "open source" code.
Why would I send an email to security@apple.com for something that is not a security issue?
> Again, have you even tried?
Yes, I tried for ld64 in the past, and I tried through what I was told had the best chances to work by an Apple employee this time for dyld. I'm not holding my breath, though.
Re: Microsoft forked MIT licensed repo and changed the copyright [fixed]
#463I lead the Microsoft Open Source Programs Office team. I'm sorry this happened. We have merged a pull request that restored the correct LICENSE file and copyright, and are in touch with the upstream author Leśny Rumcajs who emailed us this morning. We'll look to revert the entire commit that our bot made, too, since it updated the README with a boilerplate getting started guide. The bug was caused by a bot that was d…
Re: Microsoft forked MIT licensed repo and changed the copyright [fixed]
#464Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because “Microsoft Bad”. When a company gets big enough, there will always be a portion of the population you can never please, and Microsoft reached that size a long time ago.
Microsoft has a long and dark history. I think you’re brushing aside the real contention. People who were around before MS decided to open-source-wash their brand KNOW what Microsoft’s DNA is. They had a literal playbook to crush Linux.
The KKK has a long and dark history. MS is a business that at times has had slightly sharper business practices than some of its competition.
Re: Microsoft forked MIT licensed repo and changed the copyright [fixed]
#465I lead the Microsoft Open Source Programs Office team. I'm sorry this happened. We have merged a pull request that restored the correct LICENSE file and copyright, and are in touch with the upstream author Leśny Rumcajs who emailed us this morning. We'll look to revert the entire commit that our bot made, too, since it updated the README with a boilerplate getting started guide. The bug was caused by a bot that was d…
Feels like the reverse Streisand effect at play here; a high-profile minor fuckup that helps popularize a positive thing. This was fun to meme on, but I'm glad Microsoft appears to be on an upward slant ethically. It also makes me more comfortable being a Microsoft customer.
Re: Microsoft forked MIT licensed repo and changed the copyright [fixed]
#466Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is my favorite part of the culture change which is happening at Microsoft. We are still working on it. And, it will take time. Jeff's team, my team, the java team whose forked repo this unintentionally highlighted are working with dozens of other teams every week. Satya says we're all in on open source. Hold Jeff and Me and all the leaders of Microsoft to that vision. Keep us accountable. And, know this takes ti…
I realize that Microsoft is composed of many pieces, but that doesnt prevent me from treating it like a single entity. And that entity has IMHO done horrible things to it's own products and customers, so I'd rather they keep theirs hands off FLOSS as much as possible.
So, for the sake of the feelings of the innocent people who work there, I would ask everyone to please modulate the volume and intensity of ire that they project. Please speak truth to power, but don't be harsher than is needed to get your point across.
Re: Microsoft forked MIT licensed repo and changed the copyright [fixed]
#467Re: Microsoft forked MIT licensed repo and changed the copyright [fixed]
#468What's surprising to me about all the negative reactions Microsoft receives, especially on here, is that from my point of view, they are currently the most open out of all the big companies (Google, Facebook, Apple, etc). I cannot remember a time Apple has admitted to anything or made any effort to have anything that could be considered open, but they do no wrong in most people's eyes, where even a simple mistake by…
Quoted post unavailable.
Re: Microsoft forked MIT licensed repo and changed the copyright [fixed]
#469Earlier quoted context omitted.
Quoted post unavailable.
Most processes for that type of thing come about only after someone has made a mistake. Source: experience in the industry. Including having made a similar mistake myself a couple of years back (and receiving a fair bit of internet hate for it)
Re: Microsoft forked MIT licensed repo and changed the copyright [fixed]
#470What's surprising to me about all the negative reactions Microsoft receives, especially on here, is that from my point of view, they are currently the most open out of all the big companies (Google, Facebook, Apple, etc). I cannot remember a time Apple has admitted to anything or made any effort to have anything that could be considered open, but they do no wrong in most people's eyes, where even a simple mistake by…
Please, Google contributes far more to open source than both. Between Chromium (which seemingly most other browsers are based on now as well as things like VSCode) to Android, GSoC, Golang, Dart/Flutter, the Linux kernel and a bunch of other random stuff, Google has probably done as much or more for the open source ecosystem than pretty much anyone. Pretty much MS' only useful contributions to open source are from MS…