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…
Microsoft forked MIT licensed repo and changed the copyright [fixed]
501–510 of 626 posts
Re: Microsoft forked MIT licensed repo and changed the copyright [fixed]
#502I don't think that just because some "bot" did this Microsoft is to be excused. Someone decided that using a piece of software to automatically alter license files. This is a genuinely stupid idea. And they already fucked up in the same way with the CUPS project. Will they learn without someone taking them to court over this? I don't think so.
2) bot2 takes data for copilot
3) we are "sorry" for bot 1
4) bot2 took data
Re: Microsoft forked MIT licensed repo and changed the copyright [fixed]
#503Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wrong. The more links, the easier it is to argue that it's a mistake. Automation is hard, you know? Especially if no one noticed these and called them out on it until now.
> Wrong. The more links, the easier it is to argue that it's a mistake. Automation is hard, you know? Is it wrong though? I mean, if Microsoft's reiterated pattern of license switches is automated, wouldn't this also mean that the error would be easily detected based on public feedback alone? And given this was not the first or second or third separate and independent occurrence of this pattern, if this was a honest…
Please see the entire public feedback you’re a part of right now.
Re: Microsoft forked MIT licensed repo and changed the copyright [fixed]
#504I don't think that just because some "bot" did this Microsoft is to be excused. Someone decided that using a piece of software to automatically alter license files. This is a genuinely stupid idea. And they already fucked up in the same way with the CUPS project. Will they learn without someone taking them to court over this? I don't think so.
> Will they learn without someone taking them to court over this? Only on hackernews I see this level of crazyness. You need to reduce your caffein intake drastically.
Re: Microsoft forked MIT licensed repo and changed the copyright [fixed]
#505I 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]
#506Re: Microsoft forked MIT licensed repo and changed the copyright [fixed]
#507The attitude in these threads always boggles my mind. When YOU, your teammates or someone else you know makes a mistake, then it’s just a mistake. But when someone at Microsoft makes a mistake it’s because Microsoft is evil and by extension so is the person who offended. “It’s a big company”, you say. They should have a process! And I’m sad to say, they do/will have a process exactly because of this attitude. Then, e…
The difference is, most engineers I know respect and understand licenses. If you work at Microsoft - a software company - you should too.
Re: Microsoft forked MIT licensed repo and changed the copyright [fixed]
#508I 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…
Damn dude. You posted this comment on CHRISTMAS no less. Either your phone exploded or you are a VERY PASSIONATE hacker news fan. Either way ... props to you for trying your best to straighten this out immediately.
That is not, however, a complaint - being smart enough and giving a damn enough to realise that straightening it out immediately was a really good idea is impressive and laudable in and of itself.
Re: Microsoft forked MIT licensed repo and changed the copyright [fixed]
#509I 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…
For those that don't know Polish it means Forest Rumcajs (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rumcajs), probably a joke of the author that wants to be anonymous.
Re: Microsoft forked MIT licensed repo and changed the copyright [fixed]
#510Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thanks for clarifying. This also highlights the lack of sufficient testing, and subpar processes, eg automation should be tested against critical paths, and changing a license should require human approval.
Agree. The lack of tests has been the biggest regret of mine for this project. It started as a hackathon project a long time ago, and as it grew up, it never got the testing investment it deserved. I imagine the code coverage is about 0.001% and there's no end-to-end tests in place.
So, yeah, hugops, mate.