Microsoft releases F# under Apache 2.0 license • Hacker News Board

Re: Microsoft releases F# under Apache 2.0 license

#31

Post by riffraff » Fri, Nov 05, 2010, 6:31 AM UTC

SkyMarshal wrote: post #24

8ren wrote: post #10

Java is Oracle stack, C# is MS stack, objective-C is Apple stack. Is there an opportunity for an open language with similar VM ease-of-use/performance tradeoffs - or is hardware now fast enough for the ease/speed of dynamic languages to fill that gap (Python, Ruby, Javascript, ...)?

Haskell, Ocaml, and Scala? All are open languages, cross platform, and first two at least are Free. And Scala runs on both the JVM and .NET, covering all three platforms. Is that what you meant?

I believe by "haskell" you may mean "ghc"

Re: Microsoft releases F# under Apache 2.0 license

#32

Post by bad_user » Fri, Nov 05, 2010, 6:32 AM UTC

ericflo wrote: post #29

luffy wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They can't afford to do otherwise. Accepting community contributions will increase the MS surface area for copyright/patent infringements. The F# team is mostly a research outfit - they aren't going to vet patches.

Sorry, I just don't buy this. From Google, to Yahoo, to other teams in Microsoft, to small startups, to IBM, to single-person freelance developers--each one of these groups have open source projects that accept community contributions. If that increased the "surface area for copyright/patent infringements" were so great, or were such a dramatic burden, then the above would not be true. But it is true. Let's look at C…

     From Google, to Yahoo, to other teams in Microsoft, to small startups, to 
     IBM, to single-person freelance developers--each one of these groups have 
     open source projects that accept community contributions.

The difference is that Microsoft is selling these products to companies that have idiots in charge and that won't touch anything related to open-source; although it's Microsoft's fault really.

EDIT: This is their excuse, that their customers prefer to be safe in regards to the IP they buy from Microsoft.

Re: Microsoft releases F# under Apache 2.0 license

#33

Post by bad_user » Fri, Nov 05, 2010, 6:36 AM UTC

luffy wrote: post #12

MichaelGG wrote: post #8

Does it mean anything in particular that they chose the Apache 2.0 license? Their previously public plans were to use MS-Pl.

The newer projects on the MS backed OuterCurve.org (formerly Codeplex.org) all use either an Apache or BSD license. I suspect two reasons for MS accepting the Apache, BSD, and MIT licenses: 1) the terms of those license are not very onerous and let the end user pretty much do as they will. This is very important to a company like MS that has a lot of code and needs to be paranoid about subjecting themselves to patent…

Apache2 is not in the same league as BSD and MIT. It includes an explicit patents grant, versus GPL v2 which doesn't.

It's a strong license overall.

Re: Microsoft releases F# under Apache 2.0 license

#34

Post by ericflo » Fri, Nov 05, 2010, 6:38 AM UTC

bad_user wrote: post #32

ericflo wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, I just don't buy this. From Google, to Yahoo, to other teams in Microsoft, to small startups, to IBM, to single-person freelance developers--each one of these groups have open source projects that accept community contributions. If that increased the "surface area for copyright/patent infringements" were so great, or were such a dramatic burden, then the above would not be true. But it is true. Let's look at C…

From Google, to Yahoo, to other teams in Microsoft, to small startups, to IBM, to single-person freelance developers--each one of these groups have open source projects that accept community contributions. The difference is that Microsoft is selling these products to companies that have idiots in charge and that won't touch anything related to open-source; although it's Microsoft's fault really. EDIT: This is their e…

Are those people the same ones who would buy into an early-stage functional programming language like F#?

Re: Microsoft releases F# under Apache 2.0 license

#35

Post by pufuwozu » Fri, Nov 05, 2010, 6:40 AM UTC

ericflo wrote: post #29

luffy wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They can't afford to do otherwise. Accepting community contributions will increase the MS surface area for copyright/patent infringements. The F# team is mostly a research outfit - they aren't going to vet patches.

Sorry, I just don't buy this. From Google, to Yahoo, to other teams in Microsoft, to small startups, to IBM, to single-person freelance developers--each one of these groups have open source projects that accept community contributions. If that increased the "surface area for copyright/patent infringements" were so great, or were such a dramatic burden, then the above would not be true. But it is true. Let's look at C…

I think everyone agrees that accepting patches would be awesome. The F# team isn't very big and is largely made up of researchers. They have obviously thought about an open model but decided not to, for some reason or other.

Whether they have a valid reason or not, it's perfectly legitimate to create a public fork of F# and accept patches - I imagine that Microsoft will practically beg to merge in quality patches once they're proven to be popular.

Re: Microsoft releases F# under Apache 2.0 license

#36

Post by kamechan » Fri, Nov 05, 2010, 6:43 AM UTC

gphil wrote: post #2

This is a good move. With Java under Oracle's control, Microsoft has a lot to gain by embracing open source licensing.

agreed. excellent move on their part. not to mention that i'm continually impressed by what the folks at MSR put out. some smart folks, those ones. i've always found it odd that the environment there seems so contrary to that in redmond. i guess that's marketing for you.

now if they'd only do the same for the .net framework. i'm uncertain about java's future myself as are many of my friends who have invested a lot in their companies' solutions thinking that java would remain fairly OSS and are now scratching their heads.

i guess MS sells enough server and DB licences that my hopes that they'll do the same for the rest of the .net framework will remain just that. it'd be nice if they at least sanctioned the mono folks and gave them a roadmap. living under the threat that microsoft could probably swoop in and put an end to their fun doesn't make me want to use mono. that said, i generally like the .net framework (and specifically c#) more than the alternatives in the managed/oop realm. but i'm out of the loop on the status of mono, as i rarely develop in managed/oop code these days.

has there been any official acknowledgment/condoning of the mono project by MS?

Re: Microsoft releases F# under Apache 2.0 license

#37

Post by sid0 » Fri, Nov 05, 2010, 6:55 AM UTC

rbanffy wrote: post #4

That makes me believe there is no protection against contributor patents in the Apache 2.0 license... At least they won't sue you if you use it under Windows.

You post uninformed crap like this, then complain about being downvoted for anything "negative against Microsoft": http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1800507

Re: Microsoft releases F# under Apache 2.0 license

#38

Post by aaronbrethorst » Fri, Nov 05, 2010, 7:12 AM UTC

kamechan wrote: post #36

gphil wrote: post #2

This is a good move. With Java under Oracle's control, Microsoft has a lot to gain by embracing open source licensing.

agreed. excellent move on their part. not to mention that i'm continually impressed by what the folks at MSR put out. some smart folks, those ones. i've always found it odd that the environment there seems so contrary to that in redmond. i guess that's marketing for you. now if they'd only do the same for the .net framework. i'm uncertain about java's future myself as are many of my friends who have invested a lot in…

Miguel de Icaza has spoken at past MIX conferences fwiw.

Re: Microsoft releases F# under Apache 2.0 license

#39

Post by kamechan » Fri, Nov 05, 2010, 7:20 AM UTC

aaronbrethorst wrote: post #38

kamechan wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

agreed. excellent move on their part. not to mention that i'm continually impressed by what the folks at MSR put out. some smart folks, those ones. i've always found it odd that the environment there seems so contrary to that in redmond. i guess that's marketing for you. now if they'd only do the same for the .net framework. i'm uncertain about java's future myself as are many of my friends who have invested a lot in…

Miguel de Icaza has spoken at past MIX conferences fwiw.

worth a bit, actually. a letter from ballmer (or gates) saying, "dude, nice work" would be even better. :D

Re: Microsoft releases F# under Apache 2.0 license

#40

Post by mfukar » Fri, Nov 05, 2010, 7:24 AM UTC

First IronPython & IronRuby (http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1833772 ) and now this. I have to say, Microsoft is (or seems to be, depending on your philosophical disposition) increasingly embracing FOSS, and that's a very good move not only for them, but also the community.