Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by webwalker 3327 days ago
Anthony here, dev/tech lead on the project. There is the .Net version which is currently open source vs the Node version which hasn't yet been open sourced... http://getglimpse.com > .Net version vs http://node.getglimpse.com > Node version. Assuming people are interesting in it being open source, this is something that we can advocate for.
1 comments
matt4077 3327 days ago
I don't want to get all righteous, especially considering some excellent projects I've seen from Microsoft such as VSCode, but it feels like you may not understand the culture of the community you're trying to reach.

First, let me say that there's nothing wrong with closed-source software. If Microsoft wants to create the best node.js dev and/or production environment ever, and if it does so without violating any OSS licenses (which are mostly MIT, so it's possible), more power to them (/you).

However, if you call it an "open source [...] platform", and you host the source code on Github, and you're soliciting and accepting PRs from the public, then you may be creating all sorts of headaches for yourself and others. Yes, people should check the licenses for software they use. But as it is right now, many people will take the project's tagline at face value, and may be reminded of a very different Microsoft if, at some point, some other division at MS decides to crack down on the illegal use of this source code, or when you turn people's contributions into a closed-source project.

Edit: the projects also reference Microsoft's "Open Source Code of Conduct", and they are listed at https://opensource.microsoft.com/?keyword=glimpse. I've filed an issue at https://github.com/Glimpse/Home/issues/109

link
avanderhoorn 3327 days ago
@matt4077 thanks for your feedback and questions. I'll post my reply here and on the GitHub issue for coverage and for anyone else wondering at this point in time (as the answer is likely to evolve in the future).

I totally agree that having public code in a repo on github that has a proprietary license leads to headaches, hence why we haven't done that. If you take the time to have a look around the Glimpse org, all code that exists there, is under MIT/Apache2. No code associated with the Node project is yet publicly available on GitHub. Once you have looked, feel free correct me if you think something has slipped through. Given that everything is MIT/Apache2, there is no chance that someone could accidentally commit code to a repo that has a license that goes against the spirit of the community.

Regarding our use of the Open Source Code of Conduct, parts of the project, specifically the .Net components, are currently open source. Even though not all elements of the project are public, a large portion of the project is and we choose to operate under that code. For Glimpse/Home we have it mentioned there, not to confuse people, but rather to advise people the guidelines under which we are operating. If you have a chance to read through it, please feel free to reach out to me if you don't agree with what it states as it pertains to running a project.

To summarizes, the only repo under the Glimpse Org that is associated with the Node effort is Glimpse/Home and it has no code in it. All other public repos carries the MIT/Apache2 license. Glimpse/Home is our current best place for gathering feedback and is situated on Github since it is where the community is. It works given our future direction.

link