To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
I wasn't trolling ... I had pointed out time and time again the hypocrisy ... and you guys keep making up excuses why "it is alright if it is company X and not if it is company Y" ...
Microsoft contributed code for the same reasons, IBM, Redhat etc do ... because it benefits their own customers and is in their self interest.
Oracle do nothing wrong in terms of the GPL when they repackage RHEL .... which is exactly what Scientific Linux and CENTOS do ... But I don't hear you complaining about that ... Another Hypocrisy ... apparently it is alright to "rip off" if you are giving the result away for free.
This becomes tiresome ...
Edited 2011-07-19 13:52 UTC
"Oracle do nothing wrong in terms of the GPL when they repackage RHEL"
You keep saying this but because it is allowed by a license doesn't make it any less of a dick move. They not only repackage RHEL but actively trash talk what they repackage and push people to move over to Solaris. If they merely repackaged that is one thing but they break things in the process as well. Look up CentOS developers comments when they originally came up with their effort.
Just because you don't see the obvious differences between Red Hat and MS contributors doesn't mean they are the same.





Member since:
2005-07-06
So do the trolls who don't know what the heck they are talking about.