Microsoft's commitment to the international open-source community

Microsoft's commitment to the international open-source community-general Linux technology-Linux technology and application information. The following is a detailed description. Original: Yuan Meng

In February 21, Microsoft officially expressed its attitude towards the international open-source community: You win ). (Note: This is taken from a blog post published in "Web Worker Dairy .) In fact, Microsoft officially issued a "no prosecution guarantee" ("covenant not to sue") for open-source developers "), if their program contains the "patented elements" of Microsoft's communication protocol, Microsoft will expand this commitment to the non-commercial release of open-source software. What does this mean? In essence, Microsoft has made great concessions here.

I remember that at the end of the year, Microsoft joined hands with Novell and promised not to sue Novell's Linux users. The "Implication" angered a large number of "open source developers ", novell users are "charming" in their hearts. The modification of GPL 3.0 is also costly ". Microsoft announced that it had not previously greeted Novell (discussed), greatly changing the "Global Open Source situation". From then on, Novell's "exclusive advantage" will no longer exist. With Microsoft's assurance, global open-source developers (whether you are there) can be "reassured" and "let go.

For Linux distributions, the commercial and community editions (for example, Debian distributions) should not be classified as commercial releases ". Microsoft's "open-source assurance" requirement is limited to "non-commercial release" and is necessary. If your "open-source release" is used for commercial profit purposes but contains Microsoft's "Patent elements", is it fair to Microsoft? Microsoft is rich, and it cannot be called "paying for dinner everywhere ".

Today, it is clear that Microsoft acknowledges that open-source software (such as Linux) is a "competitor", but Microsoft also "makes friends" with open-source software ". What does this mean? Microsoft said to open-source friends, "you win". Can we say "you lose" to Microsoft? Obviously, this is not the case. Microsoft and open source should be "win-win ". Therefore, Microsoft has adjusted its "strategy" and we have to adjust the "strategy ". If Microsoft uses "not to sue", can we use "not to abuse )? In today's era, sitting on a bench with your opponent is not a traitor, as long as you always "understand" your mind.