Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microsoft Launches OSS Site, Submits License For Approval

Posted by Zonk on from the working-together-hand-in-hand dept.

prostoalex writes "Microsoft has launched a site dedicated to collaboration between Microsoft and open source community. The site helps developers, IT administrators, and IT buyers find out what Microsoft's product offerings are, and read articles about open source such as 'Open Source Provider Sees Sales Doubling After Moving Solutions to the Windows Platform.'" Relatedly, CNet has the news that the company has submitted its shared-sources license to the OSI for approval.

3 of 261 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Buckling under pressure? by Door+in+Cart · · Score: 5, Informative

    FOSS != OSS

    See the Wikipedia article on Alternative terms for free software and RMS's Why "Free Software" is better than "Open Source".

  2. Re:RUN AWAY!! by Ed+Avis · · Score: 5, Informative

    * Are we guaranteed that the code is patent-free and will always be open for continued use?
    You are not guaranteed that with any other free software program. In fact, it's almost guaranteed that it does infringe software patents (both those existing now, and those that will be granted in the future).

    * Does their shared-source license allow easy mixing with other FLOSS code, eg GPL and BSD licenses?
    The GPL doesn't allow easy mixing with code under any other licence, so this seems a little unfair - but yes, practically speaking it may be a problem. Mixing with MIT-style or new-style BSD code is usually unproblematic since you can just relicense that code to match the fussier licence.

    * Is there another, more well-established solution to the problem their code is solving?
    Almost all free software projects fail this test.

    * And considering the "stability" of M$ products, do we even trust the code to do what they claims
    The whole point is that you can read the code for yourself, so you don't have to trust anyone.

    I think a better list of things to consider is whether you have freedom to (1) use, (2) share, and (3) change the software. If you can do all those then it's free software, no matter which company it came from. There's no reason to hold Microsoft-written code to a different standard to other code. If it's free it's free.

    --
    -- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
  3. Re:Explanation please by Todd+Knarr · · Score: 4, Informative

    It's a reciprocity clause. Suppose A holds some patents, and they've contributed them to software S and licensed them for use there. Now, B comes along and sues everybody using software S (including A) claiming that it infringes some other patents held by B. If B uses S themselves, the clause is intended to insure that B loses their license to A's patents, opening them to being counter-sued by A for patent infringement. The idea is to force a situation where a patent-holder can't block everyone else from benefiting from a piece of software while continuing to benefit from it themselves.