Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Getting forked by Microsoft

philiplaine.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

851–860 of 1001 posts

Re: Getting forked by Microsoft

#851

Post by ryao »

DrammBA wrote: post #826
DrammBA wrote: post #443

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why you think that LLM-generated legal advise is worth posting on forum for humans? Can you quote which part of the LLM chat above constitutes legal advice? I read the whole chat and didn't see any.

for reference this was the chat that allegedly contained legal advice: https://chatgpt.com/share/6806382f-7944-800f-95aa-8c77027623...

It does not. It simply discusses ways of adding headers to arbitrary source code. The intention is to add license and copyright headers, but the reality is that these headers can say anything. It is discussing generic techniques for doing this.

Re: Getting forked by Microsoft

#852

Post by ryao »

frumplestlatz wrote: post #705
ryao wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The license does not necessarily need to be in the files. It could be a project level license in LICENSE, which is what the author here did.

It really should be in all files, not because it’s legally necessary, but because it’s the best way to ensure that the correct license/copyright follows the code to which it applies. Consider future contributions; the contributor’s copyright should apply only to the files to which they contributed. Similarly, consider any code that you incorporate from external sources; that code’s copyright and license should only a…

I was responding to this:

  Sufficient but a good idea to put copyright in all files.
  
  Technically if there's no license found then it should be considered automatically copyrighted, with no permissions to copy. So leaving copyright license out actually makes it less open source.
I said it is not legally necessary to have that in every file in the previous comment solely to contradict the idea that his project level LICENSE file did not constitute a license for the individual files. I did not at any time suggest that it was not a good idea to put notices in every file. In fact, if you look at my other comments, you will see that I said that he should have put copyright notices into every file multiple times. I even said it at the root of this thread:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43750850

Re: Getting forked by Microsoft

#853

Post by joshdavham »

jxf wrote: post #161

In distant times (before Microsoft's Satya era) I was the maintainer of a popular OSS product that scratched an important itch for specialist people who were doing work in the early cloud days. It solved my own problems, and I didn't want to make a business out of it, so I was content to release it as OSS. A Microsoft director who ran a portfolio of product teams reached out to ask about a "collaboration". I said I'd…

> There was a little grumbling about the rate but I just reiterated that it was my rate.

Would you be willing to share what your rate was? I think it'd be useful for other FOSS maintainers to get a better understanding of their worth.

Re: Getting forked by Microsoft

#854

Post by spiritplumber »

leoqa wrote: post #818
jxf wrote: post #161

In distant times (before Microsoft's Satya era) I was the maintainer of a popular OSS product that scratched an important itch for specialist people who were doing work in the early cloud days. It solved my own problems, and I didn't want to make a business out of it, so I was content to release it as OSS. A Microsoft director who ran a portfolio of product teams reached out to ask about a "collaboration". I said I'd…

I always tell this cautionary tale when talking to friends turned founders. I was going to a 1-1 with a Director (Bob) in a FANG company. As I was walking to his desk, another Director and a Senior Director (Gus) called out to him that the meeting was starting and he should join -- he asked me to come along and tell him my thoughts. It was a sales call with a 2-person tech company building some tools in the cloud nat…

Did you eat any of these people and if not, why not?

Re: Getting forked by Microsoft

#855

Post by agarren »

He got Jeff’d. Or maybe Bill’d (or Satya’d). Regardless, any kind of non-gnu open-source collaboration with the Powers That Be in the tech world is just begging for punishment. Amazon will just blatantly rebrand something, but Microsoft seems especially comfortable wasting a dev’s time mining for details before stealing or copying their work entirely.

Boo Microsoft. Winget still sucks.

I read recently that Microsoft is adopting rust more and more. I think that’s a step in the right direction for an OS with such a huge marketshare. That said, I’m just waiting for Rust.Net or Managed Rust to get excreted in a thinly veiled attempt to split the community, steal mindshare, and take over the project.

Re: Getting forked by Microsoft

#857

Post by soraminazuki »

nickelpro wrote: post #670
jeanlucas wrote: post #614

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, but Microsoft's response to this will actually be a company official position. It's a space to keep watching.

A flash in the pan about a random fork they have on Github with It baffles me that HN has no idea how large organizations work. The boss's boss's boss has no idea what random worker bees are doing.

So what's your point? That megacorps shouldn't be accountable for the actions of their employees? That people saying otherwise are clueless and should shut up?

Re: Getting forked by Microsoft

#858

Post by RayVR »

aleph_minus_one wrote: post #746
lachie83 wrote: post #722

Hi Philip, I'm Lachlan from the Cloud Native Ecosystem team at Microsoft. Our team works in the cloud native open-source community with a goal of being great open-source collaborators in these projects and communities, and I’m sorry that this happened. We appreciate your leadership and collaboration on Spegel and see your project solving a real challenge for the cloud native community. I wanted to thank you for your…

> but we failed to give you the attribution you, that was a mistake and I’m sorry. In other words: there exists some responsible person at Microsoft who violated the copyright (yes, removing the attribution is also a copyright violation!) for Microsoft. In consideration how Microsoft has been treating copyyright violators for decades, if Microsoft does not give this responsible person the same crual treatment, it sho…

https://google.github.io/opencasebook/remedies/

Re: Getting forked by Microsoft

#859

Post by [deleted] »

aleph_minus_one wrote: post #769
deknos wrote: post #748

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We hear you loud and clear .. oh, corporate wording. so you do not really care :D

> oh, corporate wording. so you do not really care :D Better do care a lot about it, and use every syllable of the corporate statement against Microsoft. :-) I.e. the principle of some martial arts: use the force that the opponent applies against himself/herself. Addendum: In this particular case > We hear you loud and clear .. can be considered as a very official statement from Microsoft that from now on, they canno…

[deleted]

Re: Getting forked by Microsoft

#860

Post by kazinator »

jxf wrote: post #161

In distant times (before Microsoft's Satya era) I was the maintainer of a popular OSS product that scratched an important itch for specialist people who were doing work in the early cloud days. It solved my own problems, and I didn't want to make a business out of it, so I was content to release it as OSS. A Microsoft director who ran a portfolio of product teams reached out to ask about a "collaboration". I said I'd…

They got a good deal; a ready-made solution (at least suitable for some real-world purposes similar to, if not quite theirs) for the price of 2 days of consulting.
Post reply on HN