5 ms·
I work on an open-source project for Microsoft, and I review and merge community PRs all the time. Nobody pays for the product I work on (or for C# or TypeScrip
by giaour 4y ago
I work on an open-source project for Microsoft, and I review and merge community PRs all the time. Nobody pays for the product I work on (or for C# or TypeScript, for that matter).
The Contributor License Agreement used on all MSFT open source projects doesn't ask you to transfer your copyright, though it does require submitters to agree to grant a permissive copyright and patent license. IANAL, but the copyright and patent clauses in Microsoft's CLA[0] do not look substantially different from the equivalent clauses in the Apache 2.0 license[1].
[0]: https://opensource.microsoft.com/pdf/microsoft-contribution-license-agreement.pdf https://opensource.microsoft.com/pdf/microsoft-contribution-...
[1]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/master/LICENSE-APACHE#L66 https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/master/LICENSE-APACHE...
- codebolt 4y agoIt's a stretch to say that nobody pays for C#. A commercial Visual Studio license sure isn't free, and depending on what you're making you're at a big disadvantage without one.
- GABeech 4y agoRight, you're not paying for C# you're paying for an IDE. You don't need VS to use C#. Especially now with Roslyn a the c# language server a lot of other IDEs can do a lot of the same things VS can do.
- codebolt 4y agoAnd if you're working on open source/non-commercially, the free community edition is also a good option.
- giaour 4y agoIndie devs and small businesses (<5 installs) can use the community edition for commercial purposes, too. I use VS Code & the C# extension most of the time, and that's free as in beer for use by anybody.
- charles_f 4y agoThe same way that js isn't free because you need webstorm or an aws account to deploy a node app? That argument is a stretch too.