6 ms·

Is releasing software for free under the GPL-2.0 a "dick move" ?

naikrovek 4y ago
> Is releasing software for free under the GPL-2.0 a "dick move" ? it is when you know that Microsoft employees are forbidden from looking at GPL code because they may unconsciously recall it and use it in a Microsoft codebase. Casey knew that at the time and admitted to licensing it GPL for that exact reason. That is a “dick move” to me. maybe i’m wrong. you be the judge, i guess.
- phenylene 4y ago
  As you say, Casey is experienced and his code is valuable. MS should pay him if they want to look at his code! He said as much in his tweets… I mean, why should he be doing charity for MS by fixing their products for them?
  - naikrovek 4y ago
    > Casey is experienced and his code is valuable. MS should pay him if they want to look at his code! He said as much in his tweets… I mean, why should he be doing charity for MS by fixing their products for them? so difficult that he wrote it so he could demonstrate how easy it is. he gladly showed the rest of us how to do it, and he intentionally took action which prevented anything he did from being used within Microsoft. Microsoft is so shitty because they don’t know [thing] so i’m going to show everyone but them how to do [thing]. he could have chosen to help. he chose to not help. he chose to complain and ridicule while intentionally avoiding doing anything to change the situation he was unhappy with.
    - DrammBA 4y ago
      it's easy, so Microsoft should write it themselves or pay for it.
      - naikrovek 4y ago
        and now you've justified all non-free software.
    - yuzuquat 4y ago
      Casey did choose to help - explaining the issue and potential solution on github. It was only after his solution was dismissed, then catching the microsoft engineers using his solution and making a blog post about it that he complained.
      - naikrovek 4y ago
        they didn't use his solution. they began to adopt his approach. began to. they are still not even close to done with it all, and the changes they would need to make to fully line up with Casey's approach can't happen because of other things the code does. they were not caught using his solution. they published a blog entry describing that they were made aware of performance problems and they didn't mention him. it was rabid fans of Casey that started foaming at the mouth then, even though Casey publicly stated he didn't want or need credit, because the idea wasn't his to begin with.
        ttybird2 4y ago
        This version of events sounds too simplified For anyone interested about the blog post drama check https://twitter.com/cmuratori/status/1522468481135902725 https://twitter.com/cmuratori/status/1522468481135902725 (hn discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31284419 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31284419) Personally I think that he owes them nothing, especially after the way he was treated in https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/issues/10362 https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/issues/10362 so I can't comprehend statements which claim that he was an asshole for using GPL.
        naikrovek 4y ago
        He owes them nothing, you're right. I made no claim that he does. I'm saying he could have helped the situation, and he deliberately chose to not only avoid helping, but to hinder anyone at Microsoft who wanted to look at that code and contribute to Windows Terminal. That was a choice he made intentionally. He could have taken the high road, there. He chose not to. It's his choice, don't get me wrong, he was well within his rights. I just disagree with that choice. that's why I call that a "dick move". And if you disagree with me, that's fine. "Dick move" means different things to different people at different times.
    - projektfu 4y ago
      Microsoft hires consultants sometimes to better understand Windows. They hire people to come lecture to them about their own software. (I'm not making fun of them, it's a good idea.) If they can't pony up for a few consulting hours to help their developers learn how to write the software they should have written, that's really on them.
      - ripley12 4y ago
        The way Casey handled this issue was... not good. He's been a jerk about it and generally dragged this whole dumb argument on way longer than needed (I can't believe we're still talking about it). He was right, but he does not seem remotely pleasant to work with and has been remarkably adversarial. Hasn't exactly fostered a "let's hire him as a consultant" relationship.
- matheusmoreira 4y ago
  > Microsoft employees are forbidden from looking at GPL code because they may unconsciously recall it and use it in a Microsoft codebase Isn't that exactly what Copilot does?
  - naikrovek 4y ago
    this is a fucking meme at this point, the amount of assumption around this. no, that is not what copilot does unless you check the box (or fail to uncheck the box) that allows exact matches of code from public repositories. https://docs.github.com/en/copilot/configuring-github-copilot/configuring-github-copilot-settings-on-githubcom#enabling-or-disabling-duplication-detection https://docs.github.com/en/copilot/configuring-github-copilo...
    - matheusmoreira 4y ago
      If Copilot can look at GPL code and use that to synthesize new code, why can't a Microsoft employee?
      - giantrobot 4y ago
        Because the lawyers haven't caught up with Copilot yet. Legal has been hounding developers for decades at this point.
        andreime 4y ago
        bingo
        naikrovek 4y ago
        eh not really. it's more about being able to reasonably testify in court that no GPL code was introduced into a codebase that they want to license with a non-GPL license and not be lying.
    - forgotpwd16 4y ago
- mmsimanga 4y ago
  It is nice to be a dominant position like Microsoft because if they weren't they would have put aside their "feelings" and hired Casey to help them out. But they don't need to. Feelings of Microsoft seem more important than feelings of all their users who will just have to bear with it.

> Is releasing software for free under the GPL-2.0 a "dick move" ? it is when you know that Microsoft employees are forbidden from looking at GPL code because they may unconsciously recall it and use it in a Microsoft codebase. Casey knew that at the time and admitted to licensing it GPL for that exact reason. That is a “dick move” to me. maybe i’m wrong. you be the judge, i guess.

phenylene 4y ago
As you say, Casey is experienced and his code is valuable. MS should pay him if they want to look at his code! He said as much in his tweets… I mean, why should he be doing charity for MS by fixing their products for them?
- naikrovek 4y ago
  > Casey is experienced and his code is valuable. MS should pay him if they want to look at his code! He said as much in his tweets… I mean, why should he be doing charity for MS by fixing their products for them? so difficult that he wrote it so he could demonstrate how easy it is. he gladly showed the rest of us how to do it, and he intentionally took action which prevented anything he did from being used within Microsoft. Microsoft is so shitty because they don’t know [thing] so i’m going to show everyone but them how to do [thing]. he could have chosen to help. he chose to not help. he chose to complain and ridicule while intentionally avoiding doing anything to change the situation he was unhappy with.
  - DrammBA 4y ago
    it's easy, so Microsoft should write it themselves or pay for it.
    - naikrovek 4y ago
      and now you've justified all non-free software.
  - yuzuquat 4y ago
    Casey did choose to help - explaining the issue and potential solution on github. It was only after his solution was dismissed, then catching the microsoft engineers using his solution and making a blog post about it that he complained.
    - naikrovek 4y ago
      they didn't use his solution. they began to adopt his approach. began to. they are still not even close to done with it all, and the changes they would need to make to fully line up with Casey's approach can't happen because of other things the code does. they were not caught using his solution. they published a blog entry describing that they were made aware of performance problems and they didn't mention him. it was rabid fans of Casey that started foaming at the mouth then, even though Casey publicly stated he didn't want or need credit, because the idea wasn't his to begin with.
      - ttybird2 4y ago
        This version of events sounds too simplified For anyone interested about the blog post drama check https://twitter.com/cmuratori/status/1522468481135902725 https://twitter.com/cmuratori/status/1522468481135902725 (hn discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31284419 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31284419) Personally I think that he owes them nothing, especially after the way he was treated in https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/issues/10362 https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/issues/10362 so I can't comprehend statements which claim that he was an asshole for using GPL.
        naikrovek 4y ago
        He owes them nothing, you're right. I made no claim that he does. I'm saying he could have helped the situation, and he deliberately chose to not only avoid helping, but to hinder anyone at Microsoft who wanted to look at that code and contribute to Windows Terminal. That was a choice he made intentionally. He could have taken the high road, there. He chose not to. It's his choice, don't get me wrong, he was well within his rights. I just disagree with that choice. that's why I call that a "dick move". And if you disagree with me, that's fine. "Dick move" means different things to different people at different times.
  - projektfu 4y ago
    Microsoft hires consultants sometimes to better understand Windows. They hire people to come lecture to them about their own software. (I'm not making fun of them, it's a good idea.) If they can't pony up for a few consulting hours to help their developers learn how to write the software they should have written, that's really on them.
    - ripley12 4y ago
      The way Casey handled this issue was... not good. He's been a jerk about it and generally dragged this whole dumb argument on way longer than needed (I can't believe we're still talking about it). He was right, but he does not seem remotely pleasant to work with and has been remarkably adversarial. Hasn't exactly fostered a "let's hire him as a consultant" relationship.
matheusmoreira 4y ago
> Microsoft employees are forbidden from looking at GPL code because they may unconsciously recall it and use it in a Microsoft codebase Isn't that exactly what Copilot does?
- naikrovek 4y ago
  this is a fucking meme at this point, the amount of assumption around this. no, that is not what copilot does unless you check the box (or fail to uncheck the box) that allows exact matches of code from public repositories. https://docs.github.com/en/copilot/configuring-github-copilot/configuring-github-copilot-settings-on-githubcom#enabling-or-disabling-duplication-detection https://docs.github.com/en/copilot/configuring-github-copilo...
  - matheusmoreira 4y ago
    If Copilot can look at GPL code and use that to synthesize new code, why can't a Microsoft employee?
    - giantrobot 4y ago
      Because the lawyers haven't caught up with Copilot yet. Legal has been hounding developers for decades at this point.
      - andreime 4y ago
        bingo
        naikrovek 4y ago
        eh not really. it's more about being able to reasonably testify in court that no GPL code was introduced into a codebase that they want to license with a non-GPL license and not be lying.
  - forgotpwd16 4y ago
mmsimanga 4y ago
It is nice to be a dominant position like Microsoft because if they weren't they would have put aside their "feelings" and hired Casey to help them out. But they don't need to. Feelings of Microsoft seem more important than feelings of all their users who will just have to bear with it.