MS to "Embrace" OSI?
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| vainrveenr Oct 17, 2007 9:47 AM EDT |
.... or maybe OSI "embracing" MS. F/OSS fanbois vs. your prevalent MS "interoperability" SHILLs?? While not exactly a blatant MS-shill, a well-known and prolific MS-Apologist even here at LXer has already responded to this OSI development, and is certain to soon follow-through with a comment of his own on this thread. But back to the present: Now just which MS shills are already at work spinning this OSI "open source nod" to attack F/OSS? Maybe to even somehow attempt to Extend such an attack to thwart further acceptance of GPLv3 ?? Hmm?..... |
| dinotrac Oct 17, 2007 9:55 AM EDT |
>MS-ApologistQuoting: Come on, you guys...stop all this Microsoft bashing. There's a very simple explanation for all of this: They're scumbags. Yeah, I'm real fond of 'em. |
| jdixon Oct 17, 2007 9:57 AM EDT |
> Yeah, I'm real fond of 'em. I was wondering if he was thinking of you or not. :) |
| dinotrac Oct 17, 2007 10:00 AM EDT |
>I was wondering if he was thinking of you or not. :) Thinking is probably the wrong verb. |
| tuxchick Oct 17, 2007 10:04 AM EDT |
Did you actually read the licenses, or the posts on the OSI site that explained the process and their reasons for approval? How will MS embrace the OSI? MS had to expend a lot of effort re-writing these licenses and following OSI's procedures until they had license text that met OSI's criteria. OSI called the shots all the way, and MS had to comply. I agree with the folks who are saying these are redundant, useless vanity licenses. But I am at a loss to understand how they will harm FOSS. None of the doomsayers have been able to explain this. Here's the likely scenario: nobody but Microsoft is going to be interested in releasing code under these licenses. So let's say Microsoft releases ProjectFoo under the Ms-RL license. At this point two things happen: either MS makes it sufficiently attractive that outside devs climb aboard, or they don't. It appears to my unlegal eyes that neither Ms-PL or MS-pl is GPL-compatible, so right there is a giant disincentive. ProjectFOO withers. Or, the licenses are GPL-compatible, which means ProjectFOO is fair game for all, including forking. ProjectFOO may or may not prosper; interesting forks may appear and thrive. Whatever happens, it does not spell doom. They're just software licenses, and last time I looked it was still considered acceptable for code authors to choose their own licensing terms. |
| dinotrac Oct 17, 2007 10:19 AM EDT |
>nobody but Microsoft is going to be interested in releasing code under these licenses. I think you hit it on the head. FOSS ain't going anywhere and an inability to comprehend the FOSS world will hurt Microsoft's ability to make money. These licenses give Microsoft a face-saving way to release a little code of their own -- with licenses they can pronounce "non-dangerous" or whatever else suits them. I continue to be amazed by the people who say they are believers in FOSS, but who wet themselves any time Microsoft comes near. FOSS should be able to withstand the Devil himself so long as he follows the rules. Goodness gracious!!! There have been some very smart people putting this stuff together over the years. FOSS is good. FOSS is strong. An army of 800lb gorillas pounding their heads against the FOSS wall will merely generate one whopping aspirin bill. |
| Bob_Robertson Oct 17, 2007 10:30 AM EDT |
> FOSS should be able to withstand the Devil himself so long as he follows the rules. Ooo! Oooo! I have to resist! Arbitrary authority, unilateral rule changes, enforcement for contracts not explicitly agreed to.... Not "devil", but a 10 letter word comes to mind. Argh! Must Resist! Otherwise Tuxchick will taunt me! |
| tuxchick Oct 17, 2007 10:34 AM EDT |
If I were in a taunting mood, Bob, I might taunt you for not having a point :) Seriously, how does the OSI approving Ms-RL and Ms-PL harm FOSS? It might harm the OSI, but not FOSS. |
| jacog Oct 17, 2007 10:35 AM EDT |
Does it rhyme with "blubber mint" ? |
| dinotrac Oct 17, 2007 10:49 AM EDT |
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!! |
| Bob_Robertson Oct 17, 2007 11:11 AM EDT |
> I might taunt you for not having a point :) I do, right here at the top of my head. |
| azerthoth Oct 17, 2007 1:12 PM EDT |
I don't see where it should harm the OSI one bit. They showed that they could distance themselves from FL which is not in their directive and follow through on technically OSS, which is in their directive. They even made, and rightly so, MS jump through a few hoops to get to an acceptable point. I have more respect for them now for proceeding with integrity. This doesn't mean you can trust MS any more or less in their antics, although I would be hard pressed to trust them less. We can thank the OSI for following their self appointed mandate faithfully without falling victim to the moralistic claptrap of certain other aspects of the community, |
| Scott_Ruecker Oct 17, 2007 1:35 PM EDT |
Quoting:Whatever happens, it does not spell doom. They're just software licenses, and last time I looked it was still considered acceptable for code authors to choose their own licensing terms. I'm with Carla on this one, these licenses are not going to be used by anyone who actually wants to "open source" their software. Which means no one will use them, which makes them harmless. Like a Cardinal.. On the side of a football helmet.. What a stupid name for a football team. |
| dinotrac Oct 17, 2007 3:45 PM EDT |
>What a stupid name for a football team. SoCal fan are we? |
| jdixon Oct 17, 2007 5:07 PM EDT |
> SoCal fan are we? Or possibly a Cincinnati Bearcats fan. |
| Scott_Ruecker Oct 17, 2007 8:35 PM EDT |
> SoCal fan are we? Nope, Arizona State Sun Devils all the way baby!! |
| jacog Oct 18, 2007 3:14 AM EDT |
Oh noooo.... ASU... er, party on dude. The dumbest (and most obnoxious) individual I have ever met online happens to be a student there. But on the light side, he makes for some of the most hilarious reading. In fact, I was quite suprised to learn he was in college. From the way he writes, I thought he was maybe 12 at most. But, I digress... |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!