Hacker News Reader

Comment by RNCTX | Hacker News Reader

I mean, they’re clearly heading toward stealing control of associated open source projects away from the founders/maintainers so I don’t think there’s even room to discuss “repairing trust.”

You might discuss repairing trust with a burglar you caught in your house after his criminal trial. At this point, Microsoft is the burglar and he’s still in your house with the ski mask on (unless you would prefer for the burglar to be a she).

View on HN

With all due respect, this simply doesn't make any sense. The projects are all released with OSI approved licenses. To use your analogy, all the stuff is already on the front lawn with "For Free" signs.

Also, this is about the .NET Foundation not Microsoft.

I said "stealing control of"

I didn't say stealing the code.

Also, the .NET Foundation is Microsoft because a Microsoft employee is doing all of this behind the scenes.

They are not stealing it because in most cases they... Legally ... own it. However, doing something behind the back of the people operating it is tone deaf, stupid and shows a great degree of arrogance and mismanagement. They pulled nuclear options dozens of times in this move. For what: to reorganize billing and streamlining processes. That is not good enough a reason to go nuclear on a maintainer w/o conversation.

.NET Foundation is not Microsoft.

After reading the blog posts linked form this one I would consider this statement very questionable.

Maybe it's not MS on paper. But the DNF looks like it would be fully under MS control.

Only 2 of 7 board members are microsoft

One of them is the founding member appointee with veto rights.

Indeed.

I think those affected have commendably kept their cool so far but I’d say this (diversity Trojan horse, “we need full control to enforce the CoC, whoops you’re fired goodbye”) is a playbook that will be often repeated in the coming years.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com