4 ms·
I don't think it's an extreme approach. It would otherwise be nearly impossible to prove that Microsoft's code is not derived from GPL'd works. At least without
by jganetsk 17y ago
I don't think it's an extreme approach. It would otherwise be nearly impossible to prove that Microsoft's code is not derived from GPL'd works. At least without revealing their code.
- ErrantX 17y agoI disagree; "you shouldn't read Open Source code" doesn't fix anything much because it's impossible to find out if developers are sticking to it or not (so it doesn't decrease the burden of proof). It's just as impossible to prove that MS work doesn't include GPL code with or without the rule :) A better (more effective) one is, surely, dont reuse restricted code.... :)
- jganetsk 17y agoMicrosoft actually tries to enforce the policy of "you shouldn't read Open Source code". For example, they block access to Sourceforge from the Microsoft campus.
- city41 17y agoThat is not true. I'm on Sourceforge on a MS Corporate machine right now. MS doesn't block anything at all. It is true we are not supposed to look at anyone else's source code though.
- ErrantX 17y agoWhat about at home? I realise the policy is probably not as originally worded here: but I was taking it somewhat literally to point out the fallacy of it. At some point we have to trust devs to do their own work. This should show that no amount of policy can stop people ripping off work! Whatever the intention. Reading code is always good; there is usually a net gain as long as it is ethical (i.e. not copied)
- sriramk 17y agoThat is totally false. There are no restrictions of any kind on the Microsoft network in general (apart from your standard virus/malware/firewall type stuff). I've synced code for my projects from sourceforge/google code/github often.
- wglb 17y agoSo if I may ask--how to use sourceforge/google code/github without looking at open source? Perhaps you are contributing without reading?