Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 4th Mar 2008 20:23 UTC, submitted by SomeMicroserf
Thread beginning with comment 303442
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 22:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 15:53 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 22:43 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 21:50 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-07-06
It shows exactly that. There is little point, if any at all, in releasing any source code to anyone in this case - and certainly not publicly on a web site. Microsoft doesn't get what releasing source code publicly actually means, and implies. They are still under the mistaken impression that they can publish source code and keep some form of control.
It looks as if neither you, nor Microsoft, get what 'open source' means as a concept - and no, it does not mean publishing something under an OSI approved license.