3 ms·

Disclaimer: I work for msft, but I don't represent them in this matter nor I have any insider information. I just read the posts. The bug post is clearly from

Disclaimer: I work for msft, but I don't represent them in this matter nor I have any insider information. I just read the posts. The bug post is clearly from a developer who I assume is a bit desperate to fix an issue. He certainly isn't representing Microsoft in the bug post - I assume he was naive and thought mentioning Microsoft would bring attention to the issue (it did, the wrong kind). There's no information about the "offer" Microsoft made, but I'll take a guess: we have an initiative that selects through voting open source projects that are awarded a one time payment of "a few thousand dollars". Unless evidenced otherwise by ffmpeg, I would assume this is where that money is coming from. A company as big as Microsoft has lots of procedures and bureaucracies involved in contracting with third parties, and I don't think they were aiming for a support contract in this instance, or, at best, someone looking for help found a simpler way of paying out, instead of going through the proper channels. People tend to see big companies as an entity of their own, instead of a bunch of people running different processes around. I think the lesson here is that we need to educate our developers on how to communicate with open source projects and third parties.

kierank 3y ago
Hi, this is a high priority ticket and FFmpeg is used in highly visible products all over the world. We have developers working for free while trillion dollar corporations want urgent help from volunteers. Please help, /s
internetter 3y ago
> People tend to see big companies as an entity of their own, instead of a bunch of people running different processes around. This is for the better. By invoking the microsoft card, they became representatives of the company. If you are using your company status to gain something, you are acting on behalf of said company. Look up respondeat superior
int_19h 3y ago
I also work for MSFT, and this story is frankly embarrassing. It's not even this particular case, it's that this is a pattern, both Microsoft-wide and industry-wide. The initiative you describe is part of the problem - it wouldn't even be relevant in this situation if we as a company properly funded the dependencies that we use. As you say, Microsoft has lots of procedures and bureaucracies, yet we have streamlined the use of F/OSS significantly compared to 12 years ago (I know; I was there when you had to have multiple meetings with lawyers every time you pulled in an open source dependency). Why didn't we do the same for supporting those dependencies? Why is it not part of the same workflow, even? Surely if something is a critical component in a shipping product, it needs to be sponsored appropriately automatically?
- fuzztester 3y ago
  >(I know; I was there when you had to have multiple meetings with lawyers every time you pulled in an open source dependency) Seen that. Sometimes corporate policy is even to put each such dependency in escrow.
hitekker 3y ago
Sounds like a lot of excuses. > He certainly isn't representing Microsoft in the bug post Your coworker chose to bring Microsoft into the conversation, he even cited his work as a blocker. Every company I've worked for as a manager or as an engineer tells me not to post on behalf of the company or my work on the company, unless approved. Because it will look like representing the company. Because it is representing the company. You take the money, you take the responsibility.

kierank 3y ago

Hi, this is a high priority ticket and FFmpeg is used in highly visible products all over the world. We have developers working for free while trillion dollar corporations want urgent help from volunteers. Please help, /s

internetter 3y ago

> People tend to see big companies as an entity of their own, instead of a bunch of people running different processes around. This is for the better. By invoking the microsoft card, they became representatives of the company. If you are using your company status to gain something, you are acting on behalf of said company. Look up respondeat superior

int_19h 3y ago

I also work for MSFT, and this story is frankly embarrassing. It's not even this particular case, it's that this is a pattern, both Microsoft-wide and industry-wide. The initiative you describe is part of the problem - it wouldn't even be relevant in this situation if we as a company properly funded the dependencies that we use. As you say, Microsoft has lots of procedures and bureaucracies, yet we have streamlined the use of F/OSS significantly compared to 12 years ago (I know; I was there when you had to have multiple meetings with lawyers every time you pulled in an open source dependency). Why didn't we do the same for supporting those dependencies? Why is it not part of the same workflow, even? Surely if something is a critical component in a shipping product, it needs to be sponsored appropriately automatically?

fuzztester 3y ago
>(I know; I was there when you had to have multiple meetings with lawyers every time you pulled in an open source dependency) Seen that. Sometimes corporate policy is even to put each such dependency in escrow.

hitekker 3y ago

Sounds like a lot of excuses. > He certainly isn't representing Microsoft in the bug post Your coworker chose to bring Microsoft into the conversation, he even cited his work as a blocker. Every company I've worked for as a manager or as an engineer tells me not to post on behalf of the company or my work on the company, unless approved. Because it will look like representing the company. Because it is representing the company. You take the money, you take the responsibility.