Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft forked MIT licensed repo and changed the copyright [fixed]

github.com

461–470 of 626 posts

Re: Microsoft forked MIT licensed repo and changed the copyright [fixed]

#461
post #391

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…

No post body was provided.

Re: Microsoft forked MIT licensed repo and changed the copyright [fixed]

#462
post #458

Earlier 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?

> What on earth are you talking about?

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]

#463

I 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…

No post body was provided.

Re: Microsoft forked MIT licensed repo and changed the copyright [fixed]

#464
post #160

Earlier 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.

“ Microsoft has a long and dark history.”

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]

#465
post #416

I 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.

No post body was provided.

Re: Microsoft forked MIT licensed repo and changed the copyright [fixed]

#466

Earlier 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.

But if you treat it like a single entity, that means you also treat all the people working there like that entity. The janitor working at Microsoft doesn't deserve your ire, nor the secretaries, etc. But they work there, and carry around their logos on their backpacks and what not. Those people have feelings, and those feelings feel bad when the entity they work for is lashed out at. It does make one feel bad when one's company is raked over the coals, because it makes one feel responsible, even if one doesn't even know what's going on.

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]

#468
post #391

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…

Quoted post unavailable.

Chrome is not open source, Chromium is.

Re: Microsoft forked MIT licensed repo and changed the copyright [fixed]

#469

Earlier 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)

Processes are built ahead of time if people take a risk seriously.

Re: Microsoft forked MIT licensed repo and changed the copyright [fixed]

#470
post #391

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…

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…

Google also contributes substantially to coreboot, I would not be surprised if Microsoft started working in open source because of google.
Post reply on HN