Microsoft Launches CodePlex, a New Collaborative Development Portal
Posted Jun 27, 2006 16:43 UTC (Tue)
by Quartz (guest, #35770)
[Link] (3 responses)
Guess most people have short attention spans and would not remember anyway...
[]s Gus
Posted Jun 27, 2006 17:59 UTC (Tue)
by kirkengaard (guest, #15022)
[Link] (2 responses)
CodePlex is about Microsoft, not about the developers. The developers are just the enablers of a PR resource, while they exploit it for what usefulness it has.
Posted Jun 27, 2006 20:58 UTC (Tue)
by emkey (guest, #144)
[Link] (1 responses)
One of the things that has made Microsoft a giant is their ability to adapt just enough to maximize their profit while minimizing any impact on their core philosophy.
Sadly, Bill Gates is a really bright and effective businessman. I don't like the guy, but his handling of IBM during the 80's was very impressive. Posted Jun 27, 2006 16:44 UTC (Tue)
by landley (guest, #6789)
[Link]
Posted Jun 28, 2006 13:39 UTC (Wed)
by meffie (guest, #3120)
[Link] (4 responses)
Where can I get the source code to CodePlex?
Posted Jun 28, 2006 14:29 UTC (Wed)
by drag (guest, #31333)
[Link] (3 responses)
Just replace 'Codeplex' with 'Launchpad' and 'Microsoft' with 'Canonical' and you got yourself a pretty damn close match. ;)
(although launchpad folks promise to open it up if they get people to work on stuff. (any Zope/Python hackers interested?))
What I would be much more worried about would be the licensing of the software that passes through Microsoft's stuff. For instance if you read the licensing on Microsoft source code samples they provide with their development tools.. It's ok to use Microsoft's provided code in your applications provided that you keep it closed source and make it so that end users have to run Windows to run your programs.
Anything that Microsoft touches needs to be held suspect and be considured tainted IMO. If given a chance they'll do everything they can to leverage 'open source' to destroy 'free software'. They aren't afraid of source code they can legally use without having to open up anything themselves, given the history of BSD code in Windows. (BSD TCP/IP stack for NT, OpenBSD as 'Windows services for Unix', etc etc) In fact I think that they would be VERY HAPPY to promote open source if it ment other people programming for them for free. (don't get me wrong.. I am not going anti-bsd or anti-opensolaris or anything. If don't mind your code being used to sell propriatory software then that's fine with me)
Posted Jun 28, 2006 16:27 UTC (Wed)
by GreyWizard (guest, #1026)
[Link] (2 responses)
Posted Jun 29, 2006 8:57 UTC (Thu)
by job (guest, #670)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted Jul 3, 2006 18:27 UTC (Mon)
by GreyWizard (guest, #1026)
[Link]
No offense taken with regard to the relative importance of comments and code. :-)
First, MS states they can't understand why developers would write open-source software... then the put out a website for doing exactly that!Microsoft Launches CodePlex, a New Collaborative Development Portal
No, they still can't understand why anyone would write free, open source software. They are, however, willing to embrace the paradigm in a nominal sense, and extend it to their benefit. They see that people are willing to write software and share code, and they see openness becoming a market value. They are willing to incorporate open development into their image so that people can play with MS development tools to potentially benefit MS, essentially for free, while they look less objectionable because they can point to how they benefit the community.Microsoft Launches CodePlex, a New Collaborative Development Portal
A bit more then a decade ago you could substitute "use the internet" for "write free, open source software", etc.Microsoft Launches CodePlex, a New Collaborative Development Portal
Its' search says "0 matches for Linux". Microsoft Launches CodePlex, a New Collaborative Development Portal
Yeah, sounds about right.
An interesting entry from the CodePlex FAQ:Microsoft Launches CodePlex, a New Collaborative Development Portal
We currently don't have plans to make the CodePlex site a shared source project. We're planning to fully support and maintain it at Microsoft, and the nature of the site requires coordination with the internal operations and hosting teams. The software is designed to run in the Microsoft data center, so it isn't something that could realistically be hosted in another environment.
Sounds very similar to Rosetta/Launchpad stuff. Even down to the excuse for not openning it up. Microsoft Launches CodePlex, a New Collaborative Development Portal
That also sounds similar to LWN, which -- correct me if I'm mistaken -- has yet to release the code that runs this site. I'm inclined to cut LWN some slack on that issue, so it's hard to be angry at Canonical or even Microsoft for the same thing. At least Microsoft has no shortage of actual transgressions that would make this particular issue merit attention. For instance, your point about using open source as leverage against free software is a good one.Microsoft, Canonical, LWN
There's a great deal of difference in the data being locked up. In the case on Launchpad/Codeplex it's code, and in the case of LWN it's our insightful comments. Absolutely no offense to anybody, but perhaps one is more important to free software than the other. :)Microsoft, Canonical, LWN
Perhaps I've misunderstood, but my impression is that Canonical's Launchpad, Microsoft's CodePlex and the LWN code are software packages that make up web applications. None of them seem designed to lock up the data they manage and even if that's incorrect the organizations involved could release the code without accepting external changes, so the availability of their source code seems unrelated to the status of that data.Microsoft, Canonical, LWN