I'm not sure why this is an article. It's obviously because Microsoft has a reputation for harming open source software. That reputation was very fairly earned, regardless of the company's current stance. The sad part is that no matter what happens now, Microsoft will never get any credit for doing anything right with GitHub.<p>If a new feature is released and people don't <i>immediately</i> like it, it will be, "See, I knew Microsoft would ruin GitHub," or "It doesn't matter that this is optional, it means that Microsoft is trying to control our workflow!"<p>If a new feature is released and people like it, it will be, "I bet Microsoft is going start charging for feature," or "Yeah, but if you spend 50 times the effort, this other forge site kind of almost does the same thing," or "This is just Microsoft trying to shove GitHub down our throats."<p>If GitLab or similar open source forges fail because it can't find a sustainable business model or because GitHub remains an actual better product, people will blame Microsoft for "intentionally destroying GitLab to get a monopoly over forge sites."<p>Regardless of how paranoid the reactions to GitHub are in the future, you can bet that a large portion of the community will be unable to look past their hatred of the company. That's not entirely unwise, and Microsoft isn't the only company with this kind of extremely poor reputation (Oracle and Facebook) or just increasingly unfavorable reputations (Amazon, Google, and Apple), but that doesn't make it less reactionary, either.
"While Microsoft talks a nice game now with regard to Linux and FOSS, it hasn't really backed it up with significant actions that merit our trust,"<p><a href="https://hub.docker.com/r/microsoft/mssql-server-linux/" rel="nofollow">https://hub.docker.com/r/microsoft/mssql-server-linux/</a><p><a href="https://github.com/Microsoft/dotnet" rel="nofollow">https://github.com/Microsoft/dotnet</a><p><a href="https://github.com/Microsoft/vscode" rel="nofollow">https://github.com/Microsoft/vscode</a><p><a href="https://github.com/Microsoft/ChakraCore" rel="nofollow">https://github.com/Microsoft/ChakraCore</a><p><a href="https://www.zdnet.com/article/top-five-linux-contributor-microsoft/" rel="nofollow">https://www.zdnet.com/article/top-five-linux-contributor-mic...</a><p><a href="https://www.networkworld.com/article/3120774/open-source-tools/microsoft-s-the-top-open-source-contributor-on-github.html" rel="nofollow">https://www.networkworld.com/article/3120774/open-source-too...</a><p><a href="https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/blog/powershell-is-open-sourced-and-is-available-on-linux/" rel="nofollow">https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/blog/powershell-is-open-so...</a><p>What the heck more does this person want? I mean I understand that old feelings die hard but come on!<p>Look, I'm not a Microsoft fan and was around for evil Microsoft, but I have to roll my eyes at a lot of the reaction and panic for this whole Github purchase.
Looking at the recent purchase of LinkedIn, the product hasn't changed much from the original purchase, and I don't expect Github to change that much either. That can be a good thing or a bad thing depending on how you look at it, but I think that's a stronger argument for leaving Github than "Micro$oft is going to kill FOSS!"
Because software engineering stopped being rational and has largely become a game of emotions and marketing? If you can trust Google and Facebook, then you can trust Microsoft.
I'm curious if someone at MS or GitHub tipped GitLab on Saturday evening to be prepared for additional traffic. Seems like it would have been a nice thing to do.
The key issue is you cannot trust whatsoever and whosoever if they were the key cornerstone of your movement. You have to have diversity and difference shall be embedded in any movement that ultimately rely upon self independence not rely upon the mercy of a big group - Facebook, Google or Microsoft. No. Can't.<p>Similar to Communist China. During the first two decades in its reform, it is fine. We have hope. There is democracy. And if one shout hard enough, it let some air in and some human rights lawyer can survive.<p>But once it grow to the size that is no longer viable to let it go. Then dictatorship (even within their ranks) and no-freedom using IT.<p>We cannot wait until the Microsoft will be bad, good a bit and may turn bad. Unless we have a say and ensure that it is not the monopoly, we cannot be rest. The world is nasty and best intent may not be good enough. The structure of unity power end with bad.<p>Choice first. The rest can sort it out in due course.