4 ms·

My experience is that it’s not higher end commercial users who would actually harass the dev, but lower scale commercial users who don’t care and the license wo

by dagmx 2y ago

My experience is that it’s not higher end commercial users who would actually harass the dev, but lower scale commercial users who don’t care and the license wouldn’t scare them off. Any large company that would care about the license, would also have terms on their employees to not directly interact with projects and would likely internally patch it if needed instead.

skybrian 2y ago
Your first sentence is a little confusing, but I can confirm that Google, at least, uses lots of open source software, and the build system automatically checks that all the third-party libraries used in an executable have a suitable license. [1] They also vendor everything and will patch security issues locally. It’s been a long time since I worked there, but I don’t know any reason that they wouldn’t send a patch upstream as well. [1] https://docs.bazel.build/versions/0.24.0/be/functions.html#licenses https://docs.bazel.build/versions/0.24.0/be/functions.html#l...
- JadeNB 2y ago
  > Your first sentence is a little confusing, but I can confirm that Google, at least, uses lots of open source software, and the build system automatically checks that all the third-party libraries used in an executable have a suitable license. [1] They also vendor everything and will patch security issues locally. I think that you and your parent agree, and that inserting an extra comma, marked by [,] below, would show this: > My experience is that it’s not higher end commercial users[,] who would actually check the license, but lower scale commercial users who don’t care and the license wouldn’t scare them off. That is, "higher-end commecial users would actually check the license, and are not engaging in this kind of behavior; lower-scale commercial users don't care about the license, and are engaging in this kind of behavior."
  - dagmx 2y ago
    Yes, you’re correct that’s what I meant. I think I accidentally mixed up two thoughts. Edited it now to clarify.
- dagmx 2y ago
  Yeah sorry I mixed up two thoughts but what I meant is that larger companies wouldn’t have engineers participating directly in this kind of behaviour. They’d check the license and stay away, or would have some formal process to participate and would know better than to harass a dev while representing a company.
__s 2y ago
I had no issue submitting PRs to random dependencies on github while at Microsoft
- dagmx 2y ago
  Does Microsoft not have a clearance process though to make sure you’re not inadvertently leaking IP? For example contribution to an Apache 2.0 project takes with it patent grants.
  - __s 2y ago
    Nope, at least not for team I was on

by dagmx 2y ago

skybrian 2y ago

Your first sentence is a little confusing, but I can confirm that Google, at least, uses lots of open source software, and the build system automatically checks that all the third-party libraries used in an executable have a suitable license. [1] They also vendor everything and will patch security issues locally. It’s been a long time since I worked there, but I don’t know any reason that they wouldn’t send a patch upstream as well. [1] https://docs.bazel.build/versions/0.24.0/be/functions.html#licenses https://docs.bazel.build/versions/0.24.0/be/functions.html#l...

JadeNB 2y ago
> Your first sentence is a little confusing, but I can confirm that Google, at least, uses lots of open source software, and the build system automatically checks that all the third-party libraries used in an executable have a suitable license. [1] They also vendor everything and will patch security issues locally. I think that you and your parent agree, and that inserting an extra comma, marked by [,] below, would show this: > My experience is that it’s not higher end commercial users[,] who would actually check the license, but lower scale commercial users who don’t care and the license wouldn’t scare them off. That is, "higher-end commecial users would actually check the license, and are not engaging in this kind of behavior; lower-scale commercial users don't care about the license, and are engaging in this kind of behavior."
- dagmx 2y ago
  Yes, you’re correct that’s what I meant. I think I accidentally mixed up two thoughts. Edited it now to clarify.
dagmx 2y ago
Yeah sorry I mixed up two thoughts but what I meant is that larger companies wouldn’t have engineers participating directly in this kind of behaviour. They’d check the license and stay away, or would have some formal process to participate and would know better than to harass a dev while representing a company.

__s 2y ago

I had no issue submitting PRs to random dependencies on github while at Microsoft

dagmx 2y ago
Does Microsoft not have a clearance process though to make sure you’re not inadvertently leaking IP? For example contribution to an Apache 2.0 project takes with it patent grants.
- __s 2y ago
  Nope, at least not for team I was on