[wilg]

They should neither rewrite the commits nor take the old packages offline. It's not worth a huge potential clusterfuck when the issue has been fixed on the latest version.

[vvillena]

You might be overestimating how hard this is, because it's not hard at all. It takes less than half an hour to create a script that does it.

[Mashimo]

What is the benefit of re-writing the git history?

[guappa]

Complying with the terms of use instead of infringing copyright

[wilg]

The terms of the license don’t require you to modify the git history that’s a goofy interpretation.

[guappa]

The terms of the license require you to ship the copyright note. Their latest release is in violation…

[kassner]

They should absolutely do it. They made a serious mistake and should pay for it, even if that means every Microsoft developer having to rebase all their WIP branches. The more expensive it gets the more they’ll pay attention to those things in the future.

[saagarjha]

Why not just fire the entire division? Maybe they should shut down the company?