On Monday, 4 June 2018 at 19:06:52 UTC, Maksim Fomin wrote:
> On Monday, 4 June 2018 at 08:42:08 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
>> On 6/3/2018 8:51 PM, Anton Fediushin wrote:
>>> This is still just a rumour, we'll know the truth on Monday (which is today).
>>
>> We'll stay on Github as long as it continues to serve our interests, which it has done very well, and I have no reason to believe will change.
>>
>> We have a number of ties to Microsoft:
>>
>> 1. It's just down the street.
>> 2. Many D users work at Microsoft.
>> 3. Microsoft has always been helpful and supportive of Digital Mars, note the files licensed from Microsoft in the distribution.
>> 4. Microsoft has invited myself and Andrei to speak at Microsoft from time to time.
>> 5. Microsoft hosts the nwcpp.org meetings, which provide a venue for me to try out D presentations to a friendly crowd.
>> 6. Microsoft has been generous with helping me solve some vexing compatibility problems from time to time.
>
> OK, so Digital Mars is in good relationship with Microsoft (I am surprised because have never heard about it). However, judging by Microsoft acqusition experience my prediction is that github will slowly but surely degradate (as suggested on some forums, everything will be firstly switched to Microsoft account - to track data, then everything will be mangled by ads, then some features deemed unnecessary by Microsoft will be removed, then linux will be badly supoorted, then some features incompatible with Microsoft services will stop working, then servers will start work poorly like skype...).
>
> P.S.
>
> My second reaction after reading news (after shock) was to visit D forum.

Unlikely, you don't spend $7.5 billion on a company because you want to send a message that you're a good dev tools company, then neglect it.

I suggest you look at their online slides linked from the Nadella blog post to see their stated plan, such as integrating github into VS Code more:

http://aka.ms/ms06042018

Of course, this is Microsoft: they probably won't execute that plan well, and likely vastly overpaid for an unprofitable company in the first place, but they emphasize that they intend to keep github open and independent.

On 6/3/18 11:51 PM, Anton Fediushin wrote:
> This is still just a rumour, we'll know the truth on Monday (which is today).
> 
> Some articles about the topic:
> 
> https://fossbytes.com/microsoft-github-aquisition-report/
> https://www.theverge.com/2018/6/3/17422752/microsoft-github-acquisition-rumors 
> 
> 
> What's your opinion about that? Will you continue using GitHub?

Of course.

> Both GitLab and Bitbucket can be used instead to host your D projects - dub registry supported them for a while now.

I use both bitbucket and github. I think I will simply continue to use what makes sense at the time (as Jonathan pointed out, hosting a private repository is free on bitbucket).

> IMHO Microsoft isn't the type of company I want to see behind the GitHub. Maybe I am wrong since Microsoft has both money and programmers to improve it further, I just don't trust them too much which is the right thing to do when dealing with companies. This means that I will move my repositories elsewhere and use GitHub just to contribute to other projects.

I don't know if it makes any difference to me. Sure, they have infrastructure and market share, but all that changes if they do something really annoying. There are good competing sites, and people will just move their stuff. I'm sure it wouldn't take long for someone to make software that ports your entire github project to gitlab or whatever, maybe it already exists.

Microsoft just isn't the same big bad company that once paid for Linux licenses from SCO group to fund their lawsuit against Linux. This past year, they actually incorporated part of Linux into their OS! I don't think this is necessarily going to be bad for github.

One thing I have read that is intriguing: if you are a Microsoft competitor and you have private-source repos at github, how do you feel about that?

-Steve

On 6/4/18 2:46 PM, Anton Fediushin wrote:

> Of course MS does, since they spent $5 billion on it. They will try their best to make profit out of it, just like they did with LinkedIn.

$7.5 billion.

-Steve

On Monday, 4 June 2018 at 19:26:23 UTC, Joakim wrote:
> On Monday, 4 June 2018 at 19:06:52 UTC, Maksim Fomin wrote:
>
> Unlikely, you don't spend $7.5 billion on a company because you want to send a message that you're a good dev tools company, then neglect it.

You have no idea about how big corporations' management spends money.
As with Nokia and Skype - I don't know whether it was initially a plan to destroy products or management was just silly.

> I suggest you look at their online slides linked from the Nadella blog post to see their stated plan, such as integrating github into VS Code more:
>
> http://aka.ms/ms06042018
>
> and likely vastly overpaid for an unprofitable company in the first place

:) this is exactly how such deals are done - paying $7.5 bl. for nonprofitable company.
Unfortunately, their books are unavailable because they are private company, but scarce information in the web suggests that in most of their years they have losses.

Just as rough estimate: to support $7.5 bl valuation Microsoft must turn -$30 ml. net loss company into business generating around $750 ml. for many years. There is no way to get these money from the market. Alternatively, the project can have payoff if something is broken and Microsoft cash flows increase by $750 ml. This is more likely...

> but they emphasize that they intend to keep github open and independent.

They can claim anything which suits best their interests right now. Or, as alternative, github can be broken in a such way, that their promises on surface are kept. Business is badly compatible with opensource by design.

On Monday, 4 June 2018 at 19:26:23 UTC, Joakim wrote:
> On Monday, 4 June 2018 at 19:06:52 UTC, Maksim Fomin wrote:
>> [...]
>
> Unlikely, you don't spend $7.5 billion on a company because you want to send a message that you're a good dev tools company, then neglect it.
>
> I suggest you look at their online slides linked from the Nadella blog post to see their stated plan, such as integrating github into VS Code more:
>
> http://aka.ms/ms06042018
>
> Of course, this is Microsoft: they probably won't execute that plan well, and likely vastly overpaid for an unprofitable company in the first place, but they emphasize that they intend to keep github open and independent.


Yeah, like they did codeplex!

On 6/3/18 20:51, Anton Fediushin wrote:
> This is still just a rumour, we'll know the truth on Monday (which is today).
> 
> Some articles about the topic:
> 
> https://fossbytes.com/microsoft-github-aquisition-report/
> https://www.theverge.com/2018/6/3/17422752/microsoft-github-acquisition-rumors 
> 
> 
> What's your opinion about that? Will you continue using GitHub?
> 
> Both GitLab and Bitbucket can be used instead to host your D projects - dub registry supported them for a while now.
> 
> IMHO Microsoft isn't the type of company I want to see behind the GitHub. Maybe I am wrong since Microsoft has both money and programmers to improve it further, I just don't trust them too much which is the right thing to do when dealing with companies. This means that I will move my repositories elsewhere and use GitHub just to contribute to other projects.
> 

I've been thinking how to best respond to this and here is where I am.

First, let me state up-front that I work for Microsoft (Office 365 Workplace Analytics). Second, my employer (Volometrix) prior to working for Microsoft was acquired by Microsoft almost three years ago.

What that means is that while my division had no fore-warning of this acquisition I have first-hand experience with what will be happening at GitHub over the next months and years.

As an employee of Microsoft I am required to follow Microsoft's policy on Social Media, which can be reduced to "If you have nothing nice to say, then say nothing at all." Or stated plainly, what follows may or may not represent the entirety of my thoughts on the matter as I am effectively barred from revealing any negative thoughts.

So what I can say about this acquisition is that it is the best possible outcome of GitHub's possible futures for both the company and the employees. GitHub has not been profitable for years and is thought to have had cash reserves for only one or two more months of operations. Losing GitHub entirely overnight would have been an unmitigated disaster for the entire Open-Source community. And there are fates worse than death. Imagine for a second GitHub at Google or ... *shudder* Oracle. Whatever your opinions about Microsoft, you cannot possible imagine that either of those outcomes would have been qualitatively better. In that sense Microsoft was the best of the bad options GitHub.

As to any other concerns/opinions, all I will say is ... think laterally.

-- 
Adam Wilson
IRC: LightBender
import quiet.dlang.dev;

Sorry to hear that. Since I do not belive Microsoft changed perspective and am convinced they still see open source as cancer I need to assume they try to inflitrate the OSS community the last years. So for sure I won't rely on their stuff.

So is there a chance Digital Mars and D main development is getting bought by Microsoft?

BR
Ralph

On 06/04/2018 11:46 PM, RalphBa wrote:
> Sorry to hear that. Since I do not belive Microsoft changed perspective and am convinced they still see open source as cancer I need to assume they try to inflitrate the OSS community the last years. So for sure I won't rely on their stuff.
> 
> So is there a chance Digital Mars and D main development is getting bought by Microsoft?
> 
> BR
> Ralph

They have C++ and C#. What do they need D for?

-- 
Adam Wilson
IRC: LightBender
import quiet.dlang.dev;

On 06/04/2018 08:53 PM, Adam Wilson wrote:
> On 6/3/18 20:51, Anton Fediushin wrote:
>> This is still just a rumour, we'll know the truth on Monday (which is today).
>>
>> Some articles about the topic:
>>
>> https://fossbytes.com/microsoft-github-aquisition-report/
>> https://www.theverge.com/2018/6/3/17422752/microsoft-github-acquisition-rumors 
>>
>>
>> What's your opinion about that? Will you continue using GitHub?
>>
>> Both GitLab and Bitbucket can be used instead to host your D projects - dub registry supported them for a while now.
>>
>> IMHO Microsoft isn't the type of company I want to see behind the GitHub. Maybe I am wrong since Microsoft has both money and programmers to improve it further, I just don't trust them too much which is the right thing to do when dealing with companies. This means that I will move my repositories elsewhere and use GitHub just to contribute to other projects.
>>
> 
> I've been thinking how to best respond to this and here is where I am.
> 
> First, let me state up-front that I work for Microsoft (Office 365 Workplace Analytics). Second, my employer (Volometrix) prior to working for Microsoft was acquired by Microsoft almost three years ago.
> 
> What that means is that while my division had no fore-warning of this acquisition I have first-hand experience with what will be happening at GitHub over the next months and years.
> 
> As an employee of Microsoft I am required to follow Microsoft's policy on Social Media, which can be reduced to "If you have nothing nice to say, then say nothing at all." Or stated plainly, what follows may or may not represent the entirety of my thoughts on the matter as I am effectively barred from revealing any negative thoughts.
> 
> So what I can say about this acquisition is that it is the best possible outcome of GitHub's possible futures for both the company and the employees. GitHub has not been profitable for years and is thought to have had cash reserves for only one or two more months of operations. Losing GitHub entirely overnight would have been an unmitigated disaster for the entire Open-Source community. And there are fates worse than death. Imagine for a second GitHub at Google or ... *shudder* Oracle. Whatever your opinions about Microsoft, you cannot possible imagine that either of those outcomes would have been qualitatively better. In that sense Microsoft was the best of the bad options GitHub.
> 
> As to any other concerns/opinions, all I will say is ... think laterally.
> 

As a reminder I have no inside information on what goes on over in the Azure world and that is where GitHub will land as has been announced.

-- 
Adam Wilson
IRC: LightBender
import quiet.dlang.dev;

On Tuesday, 5 June 2018 at 06:50:41 UTC, Adam Wilson wrote:
> On 06/04/2018 11:46 PM, RalphBa wrote:
>> Sorry to hear that. Since I do not belive Microsoft changed perspective and am convinced they still see open source as cancer I need to assume they try to inflitrate the OSS community the last years. So for sure I won't rely on their stuff.
>> 
>> So is there a chance Digital Mars and D main development is getting bought by Microsoft?
>> 
>> BR
>> Ralph
>
> They have C++ and C#. What do they need D for?

C# yes... they have. C++ they have just the windows world which is just a small part of the C++ ecosystem. The rest is mostly shared between GNU Compilers and LLVM.

Well, gladly LLVM also play D now, so even a takeover from M$ might not lead to more but in worst case a fork. So if DM is in a "we would do such deal" mood, it would be wise for the D community to bet on ldc. Also I hope GDC will see a revival one day.