4 ms·

Open sourcing code can be tricky—there's quite a bit of review that needs to go into doing it right, as well as more work if you want the release to actually be

Open sourcing code can be tricky—there's quite a bit of review that needs to go into doing it right, as well as more work if you want the release to actually be reasonably useful. Blocking this archiving effort is on a whole other level. We're talking about saving information that was already public. All they have to do to allow this to happen is... nothing. I can't comprehend why Verizon/Yahoo would go out of their way to block these efforts.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
unethical_ban 7y ago
It depends on the size of the codebase and how shitty your programmers are, but if you aren't greedy or scared of over-litigation, it isn't hard at all. I have written great contributions to a python API library that could be of benefit to the community around it. The code has nothing to do with my company's core competency, and the code is used for internal orchestration, so "exposing insecure code" is an unlikely concern. It is easier for a lawyer, especially a luddite, to say "no" than to help their employees give back to the world.
- johannes1234321 7y ago
  For new code it is indeed "simple". Old code however likely contains third party provided code, be it from libraries or code provided by contractors, where no (clear) license permitting relicensing of the source is available. This can be quite complex historic work as version history might not exist (which code come from where?) and documentation is limited (paper contracts lost in archives) and so on.
  - unethical_ban 7y ago
    First, to Hell with whoever downvoted me, probably lawyers (not you, johannes). Second, I get there are occasionally complicating factors, BUT - licensing can't be difficult at most times, since the company often owns what the worker produces - for better or worse, it's simple that way. As for third party work, are you talking about library imports, or copy and paste? The logistics of solving those problems are either simple or really complex.
    - johannes1234321 7y ago
      Yes, they own what employed workers produce. But especially before there was such a number of freely available open source licenses software vendors licensed tons of stuff, often in source, often without permission to relicense the source and over time developers refsctored the licensed code, which makes it hard to trace code back. Especially since version control often was done by having different sets of floppies, which are all gone.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

unethical_ban 7y ago

It depends on the size of the codebase and how shitty your programmers are, but if you aren't greedy or scared of over-litigation, it isn't hard at all. I have written great contributions to a python API library that could be of benefit to the community around it. The code has nothing to do with my company's core competency, and the code is used for internal orchestration, so "exposing insecure code" is an unlikely concern. It is easier for a lawyer, especially a luddite, to say "no" than to help their employees give back to the world.

johannes1234321 7y ago
For new code it is indeed "simple". Old code however likely contains third party provided code, be it from libraries or code provided by contractors, where no (clear) license permitting relicensing of the source is available. This can be quite complex historic work as version history might not exist (which code come from where?) and documentation is limited (paper contracts lost in archives) and so on.
- unethical_ban 7y ago
  First, to Hell with whoever downvoted me, probably lawyers (not you, johannes). Second, I get there are occasionally complicating factors, BUT - licensing can't be difficult at most times, since the company often owns what the worker produces - for better or worse, it's simple that way. As for third party work, are you talking about library imports, or copy and paste? The logistics of solving those problems are either simple or really complex.
  - johannes1234321 7y ago
    Yes, they own what employed workers produce. But especially before there was such a number of freely available open source licenses software vendors licensed tons of stuff, often in source, often without permission to relicense the source and over time developers refsctored the licensed code, which makes it hard to trace code back. Especially since version control often was done by having different sets of floppies, which are all gone.