undefined | Better HN

0 pointsNobodyNada11mo ago0 comments

Yes, that is the condition of the MIT license.

0 comments

Ok, but then why not just opening a PR in the repo asking for that? Sounds like a very minor change. Yes, they have to do it and they should. But I feel like insulting them because they gave credit in the README but not exactly in the proper way is a bit aggressive.

Engineers in big companies are quick to criticise how the legal department is a pain in the ass, but when I see the reactions here, I completely understand why it is.

ApolloFortyNine11mo ago

It definitely seems like this whole thing is known by maybe 5 individuals at Microsoft. It's not some big affront on open source software, they didn't relicense the code under a less permissive license or anything, they just updated the copyright notice improperly. And that part I wouldn't be shocked was a single individual dev's doing.

I agree, op should make a PR, state their case, and then complain if it's not merged.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

palata11mo ago

Engineers in big companies are quick to criticise how the legal department is a pain in the ass, but when I see the reactions here, I completely understand why it is.

ApolloFortyNine11mo ago

I agree, op should make a PR, state their case, and then complain if it's not merged.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse