4 ms·

I will circle back in a year or so to see if this 'sticks' -- very few Microsoft open source projects provide enough value / demonstrate enough inertia this ear

by j_s 9y ago

I will circle back in a year or so to see if this 'sticks' -- very few Microsoft open source projects provide enough value / demonstrate enough inertia this early in their lifecycle to justify any investment on my part. https://github.com/MicrosoftArchive/redis/issues/556 https://github.com/MicrosoftArchive/redis/issues/556 (Jun-Sep 2017) >Why do MS always do this??? Start something, announce it aloud "we are now open source, we are now this and that blah blah" then quietly do a 360 and moonwalk away

panta 9y ago
Perhaps a 180? :-)
- smnscu 9y ago
  My reaction exactly, but it's actually a joke. > do a 360 and moonwalk away
  - rounce 9y ago
    It made me think of this Jason Kidd quote: "We're going to turn this team around 360 degrees"
    - genzoman 9y ago
      Came here for this :)
- j_s 9y ago
  To be clear for non-Michael-Jackson-fans: 360 + moonwalk works out the same (by sliding away backwards). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moonwalk_%28dance%29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moonwalk_%28dance%29 >moves backwards while seemingly walking forwards It's actually a near-perfect analogy here, where actions speak louder than words re: Microsoft's commitment to maintaining adaptations of existing open source projects. I think the example provided is enough to trigger a careful analysis before jumping in, and I would love to see counter-examples to help balance the evaluation. (Please note: very specifically requesting counter-examples of Microsoft-official, intended for production, open source repositories demonstrating long-term maintenance of tweaks of/dependencies on established open source projects that for whatever reason were never up-streamed.)
  - panta 9y ago
    ah, cool, thanks! I didn't get it!
  - chucky_z 9y ago
    In the case of Microsoft specifically it's a silly meme that started due to the Xbox 360. 'Why do they call it the Xbox 360? Because when you see it you do a 360 and walk away.'
- FascinatedBox 9y ago
  No, 360 is right: https://www.reddit.com/r/OutOfTheLoop/comments/2cwh0m/can_someone_explain_this_360_degree_turn_then/ https://www.reddit.com/r/OutOfTheLoop/comments/2cwh0m/can_so...
- jonny_eh 9y ago
  They did a 360 with xbox
youdontknowtho 9y ago
How do you know if they are still using it internally? It could have wide adoption inside Microsoft. They built this to scratch an itch, then they opened the source, but that's still not enough?
- bad_user 9y ago
  People in the Microsoft camp still have to adapt to the Open Source mentality. If the maintainers of a project don't manage the project properly and other people think they can do a better job, Open Source gives you the right to fork. And this social contract is an incentive for the maintainers to do a good job in order to not lose control. On the other hand the maintainers have no contractual obligation to keep supporting the project. When maintainers stop supporting the project, the code is still there to be picked up if there's enough interest. That's powerful, but also distributes the responsibility to all interested parties. If no new maintainers show up to fork the project, then maybe it's OK for the project to die.
  - jsgo 9y ago
    sounds like any other piece of software except that with it being open, someone can fork it. Software dies sometimes. That's kind of life. But it is better for them to go this new track than to push out closed items that people legitimately stake their livelihoods on and then kill it off when something else comes along. When Windows Phone 7 was the new thing, I went to one of the Microsoft dev camps for it. I vividly remember someone in the audience, standing in the walkway berating the guy on stage talking about Windows Phone 7 development because he had been focused on some Microsoft technology (Silverlight? WPF? I can't remember) and they had basically relegated it to the past by switching over to this new framework. At the time, I was kind of just mind blown, but in retrospect I can see his disappointment. If it were open source, either another entity could champion it or it would still go in the heap of bygone frameworks, but at least then it stood a chance. And I'm fine with Microsoft playing around with something, open sourcing it, and then they decide there is something else out there they want to work with. Mostly in cases like this where it isn't a "product" they're attempting to market. Seems to be an okay process and perhaps someone can look at what they left in their wake to gain some kind of insight from it.
dclowd9901 9y ago
No doubt, but this API is something to behold. Either it's going to make it, or Facebook is going to ape it and that version will make it. I mean they probably use at least some variant of this for their multi-threaded flow-bin. I'll be happy either way, tbh.
mohamedmansour 9y ago
There is a roadmap on GitHub https://github.com/Microsoft/napajs/wiki/roadmap https://github.com/Microsoft/napajs/wiki/roadmap

by j_s 9y ago

panta 9y ago

Perhaps a 180? :-)

smnscu 9y ago
My reaction exactly, but it's actually a joke. > do a 360 and moonwalk away
- rounce 9y ago
  It made me think of this Jason Kidd quote: "We're going to turn this team around 360 degrees"
  - genzoman 9y ago
    Came here for this :)
j_s 9y ago
To be clear for non-Michael-Jackson-fans: 360 + moonwalk works out the same (by sliding away backwards). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moonwalk_%28dance%29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moonwalk_%28dance%29 >moves backwards while seemingly walking forwards It's actually a near-perfect analogy here, where actions speak louder than words re: Microsoft's commitment to maintaining adaptations of existing open source projects. I think the example provided is enough to trigger a careful analysis before jumping in, and I would love to see counter-examples to help balance the evaluation. (Please note: very specifically requesting counter-examples of Microsoft-official, intended for production, open source repositories demonstrating long-term maintenance of tweaks of/dependencies on established open source projects that for whatever reason were never up-streamed.)
- panta 9y ago
  ah, cool, thanks! I didn't get it!
- chucky_z 9y ago
  In the case of Microsoft specifically it's a silly meme that started due to the Xbox 360. 'Why do they call it the Xbox 360? Because when you see it you do a 360 and walk away.'
FascinatedBox 9y ago
No, 360 is right: https://www.reddit.com/r/OutOfTheLoop/comments/2cwh0m/can_someone_explain_this_360_degree_turn_then/ https://www.reddit.com/r/OutOfTheLoop/comments/2cwh0m/can_so...
jonny_eh 9y ago
They did a 360 with xbox

youdontknowtho 9y ago

How do you know if they are still using it internally? It could have wide adoption inside Microsoft. They built this to scratch an itch, then they opened the source, but that's still not enough?

bad_user 9y ago
People in the Microsoft camp still have to adapt to the Open Source mentality. If the maintainers of a project don't manage the project properly and other people think they can do a better job, Open Source gives you the right to fork. And this social contract is an incentive for the maintainers to do a good job in order to not lose control. On the other hand the maintainers have no contractual obligation to keep supporting the project. When maintainers stop supporting the project, the code is still there to be picked up if there's enough interest. That's powerful, but also distributes the responsibility to all interested parties. If no new maintainers show up to fork the project, then maybe it's OK for the project to die.
- jsgo 9y ago
  sounds like any other piece of software except that with it being open, someone can fork it. Software dies sometimes. That's kind of life. But it is better for them to go this new track than to push out closed items that people legitimately stake their livelihoods on and then kill it off when something else comes along. When Windows Phone 7 was the new thing, I went to one of the Microsoft dev camps for it. I vividly remember someone in the audience, standing in the walkway berating the guy on stage talking about Windows Phone 7 development because he had been focused on some Microsoft technology (Silverlight? WPF? I can't remember) and they had basically relegated it to the past by switching over to this new framework. At the time, I was kind of just mind blown, but in retrospect I can see his disappointment. If it were open source, either another entity could champion it or it would still go in the heap of bygone frameworks, but at least then it stood a chance. And I'm fine with Microsoft playing around with something, open sourcing it, and then they decide there is something else out there they want to work with. Mostly in cases like this where it isn't a "product" they're attempting to market. Seems to be an okay process and perhaps someone can look at what they left in their wake to gain some kind of insight from it.

dclowd9901 9y ago

No doubt, but this API is something to behold. Either it's going to make it, or Facebook is going to ape it and that version will make it. I mean they probably use at least some variant of this for their multi-threaded flow-bin. I'll be happy either way, tbh.

mohamedmansour 9y ago

There is a roadmap on GitHub https://github.com/Microsoft/napajs/wiki/roadmap https://github.com/Microsoft/napajs/wiki/roadmap