5 ms·

I would disagree Yes, they should make it clear that xCurl has nothing to do with real curl. But if it intends to implement the same interface, I don't see an

I would disagree Yes, they should make it clear that xCurl has nothing to do with real curl. But if it intends to implement the same interface, I don't see any problem with saying look at the curl docs for what its supposed to do. I don't see how that would be much different then if you implemented your own web browser and was like, look at MDN for how its supposed to work.

addicted 3y ago
If this was an Alpha software that was created a few months ago and is rapidly changing then sure, link back to the original. But we’re talking about curl here. MS could have an intern copy paste the curl document, delete the stuff that doesn’t apply to XCurl, and host it on a shared OneDrive Word document all within a day, and it would be orders of magnitude a significantly better experience. Instead curl maintainers will end up spending man years supporting XCurl issues instead.
- hducy4 3y ago
  Yea, but we're talking about Microsoft here. Why would you expect anything else? I get the feeling people think MS is different now it has embraced open source.
Cogito 3y ago
"Hey, your docs say that curl should be doing this, but it's not working for me?" <2 pages of back-and-forth posts later> "Oh you're using xCurl, yeah you need to talk to Microsoft." It probably depends on the reach this has within the intended audience (people wanting to deploy libcurl on Xbox?) as to how much of a support burden it will end up, but I suspect more than Mozilla has to deal with from similar situations.
- cxr 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - Lukas_Skywalker 3y ago
    But the comments are not the same? bawolff says it wouldn't be a problem to just link the curl docs. Cogito says it would, since users would just ask Daniel for help, thinking xCurl was the same as curl, despite them having different implementations. This would place a large burden on Daniel.
    - cxr 3y ago
      [flagged]
  - Cogito 3y ago
    The point I'm supporting is that users will not realise that the documentation that is linked to is from a different project than the one being used. Hopefully, by focusing on an example of how a support interaction could go (clueless user, lots of back and forth before the key issue is identified), it shows how this practice is good for neither users nor for the curl team who will end up dealing with the fallout. I also address the MDN example by stating that I suspect the audience and reach of xCurl will create a larger support burden for curl than Mozilla would see in similar situations (aside: even though it wouldn't be reasonable in that case either!) Unless it's done very carefully, pointing users to the parent project's documentation will cause a support burden on that project, and that's just not reasonable for Microsoft to do in this situation.
    - cxr 3y ago
      [flagged]
Karellen 3y ago
What if you called your browser xFirefox, and suggested it would be equivalent to "Firefox" on the MDN "Browser compatibility" tables. And you have 1000x the resources of Mozilla at your disposal.
- jagger27 3y ago
  Well, you’d need to adhere to the license terms of the MPL which generally requires changes to be shared back.
- IceyEC 3y ago
  You'd probably have a trademark lawyer calling you up
Hamuko 3y ago
They should at least mirror the documentation on their own domain to make it clear that there's no (direct) link between the projects.

addicted 3y ago

If this was an Alpha software that was created a few months ago and is rapidly changing then sure, link back to the original. But we’re talking about curl here. MS could have an intern copy paste the curl document, delete the stuff that doesn’t apply to XCurl, and host it on a shared OneDrive Word document all within a day, and it would be orders of magnitude a significantly better experience. Instead curl maintainers will end up spending man years supporting XCurl issues instead.

hducy4 3y ago
Yea, but we're talking about Microsoft here. Why would you expect anything else? I get the feeling people think MS is different now it has embraced open source.

Cogito 3y ago

"Hey, your docs say that curl should be doing this, but it's not working for me?" <2 pages of back-and-forth posts later> "Oh you're using xCurl, yeah you need to talk to Microsoft." It probably depends on the reach this has within the intended audience (people wanting to deploy libcurl on Xbox?) as to how much of a support burden it will end up, but I suspect more than Mozilla has to deal with from similar situations.

cxr 3y ago
[flagged]
- Lukas_Skywalker 3y ago
  But the comments are not the same? bawolff says it wouldn't be a problem to just link the curl docs. Cogito says it would, since users would just ask Daniel for help, thinking xCurl was the same as curl, despite them having different implementations. This would place a large burden on Daniel.
  - cxr 3y ago
    [flagged]
- Cogito 3y ago
  The point I'm supporting is that users will not realise that the documentation that is linked to is from a different project than the one being used. Hopefully, by focusing on an example of how a support interaction could go (clueless user, lots of back and forth before the key issue is identified), it shows how this practice is good for neither users nor for the curl team who will end up dealing with the fallout. I also address the MDN example by stating that I suspect the audience and reach of xCurl will create a larger support burden for curl than Mozilla would see in similar situations (aside: even though it wouldn't be reasonable in that case either!) Unless it's done very carefully, pointing users to the parent project's documentation will cause a support burden on that project, and that's just not reasonable for Microsoft to do in this situation.
  - cxr 3y ago
    [flagged]

Karellen 3y ago

What if you called your browser xFirefox, and suggested it would be equivalent to "Firefox" on the MDN "Browser compatibility" tables. And you have 1000x the resources of Mozilla at your disposal.

jagger27 3y ago
Well, you’d need to adhere to the license terms of the MPL which generally requires changes to be shared back.
IceyEC 3y ago
You'd probably have a trademark lawyer calling you up

Hamuko 3y ago

They should at least mirror the documentation on their own domain to make it clear that there's no (direct) link between the projects.