The 'theft' continues. Dare we even tell Microsoft what "open source" is about? Well, after all, Microsoft is King of SourceForge (finally sharing the crown a little, with doubt still hanging). You are now required to know that open source boils down to only a development methodology and, as SourceForge indicates, programming tools like Visual Studio are available for the job.
Yet as Sandcastle demonstrates, Microsoft still has a long ways to go before it demonstrates that it understands and is willing to stand behind the obligations of open source. The Sandcastle project went live on January 8. Several months later, it still isn't providing source code, a key tenet of the CodePlex hosting requirements
[...]
Microsoft built CodePlex. It can do with it what it wants. But what it can't do is borrow the term "open source" for marketing purposes and then fail to live up to the Open Source Definition. I thought the company understood that. Sandcastle makes me wonder....
So, Microsoft, your options are clear: 1) Request the site owner to provide source code or 2) Properly label CodePlex as a code repository, but not necessarily as an open-source code repository.
Mr. Matusow, South Africa and the Microsoft brainwasher
[...]
But Jason, reread your post, you're the one who framed the debate around platform and the Linux vs. Windows opposition. Everybody knows that FOSS is much more than that.
And also please stop implicitly equating FOSS to development methodology.
Comments
Bob
2008-06-08 08:55:21
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html