• CapriciousDay@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 hours ago

    Open source or not WSL is just a long game embrace, extend, extinguish and particularly designed to stop *NIX OSs gaining a foothold in the enterprise development space.

  • beeng@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 hours ago

    Now make windows run just for compatibility on a Linux Subsystem. How we actually need it in daily life…

  • Badabinski@kbin.earth
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 hours ago

    From the repo’s CONTRIBUTING.md:

    Most contributions require you to agree to a Contributor License Agreement (CLA)

    Meh, a permissive license + a copyright transfer means this shit is just a potential rugpull. MSFT can change the license of the project to source-available or even proprietary at any time and you’ll be powerless to stop it.

    • TMP_NKcYUEoM7kXg4qYe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 hours ago

      CLA is basically a requirement for any larger scale open source project. It would be mental to add a “this single edited line is licensed under X license” to every tiny commit. Microsoft’s CLA does not tranfer rights btw, it just licenses your contribution to M$ under “basically BSD 0 clause license” terms.

      I guess sure they could do a ragpull but it does not make much sense. Reasons:

      1. they have open sourced it themselves

      2. It’s made by M$ for M$. They don’t have competition in the Windows space, so there is no point to hide the code.

      Also what would be the worst thing that could happen if they did that? You would either use a fork, because WSL2 is basically feature complete at this points, or you would be have to use a proprietary app on a proprietary OS. Imo the licensing of WSL specifically is the least of Windows’ issues.

      • Badabinski@kbin.earth
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        42 minutes ago

        You absolutely do not need a CLA with a copyright transfer. There are plenty of large projects that use a Developer Certificate of Origin that protects the company while not allowing them to change the license of your contribution.

        I’ll grant that my original post was pissy and angry and not a great take, however. You make good points here.

      • Badabinski@kbin.earth
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        40 minutes ago

        You’re correct, but I don’t believe that a company shouldn’t be allowed to take my code and change its license in the future. If they want to take something proprietary, they can go ahead and remove my contribution from it first.

        • schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          39 minutes ago

          If you want to enforce that, you need to fork it and put a copyleft license on it. This is very rarely done because it’s more work to maintain software than to write it…

          • Badabinski@kbin.earth
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            35 minutes ago

            Hence my initial whinging about how this was released with a permissive license and a copyright transfer. The longer I’m involved in this industry, the less I like permissive software licensing. There’s obviously a place for it, but my tolerance for permissive licensing is directly tied to my trust for the person or organization backing the software. I don’t trust Microsoft, and I don’t think I will ever personally contribute to their software unless my contribution is made under a copyleft license and with a DCO, not a copyright-transferring CLA.

  • obvs@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    71
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    15 hours ago

    I wish they’d open source the name.

    It should be called the “Linux Subsystem for Windows”.

    • morrowind@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      28
      ·
      15 hours ago

      It’s so annoying, because both are technically grammatically correct, but the current one just sounds the opposite

      • aksdb@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        3 hours ago

        Microsoft really has a knack for that. I also like WoW64, which contains the binaries for running 32 bit applications on Windows 64 bit. For historical reasons, the 64 bit binaries live in system32, obviously.

    • fakeplastic@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      13
      ·
      15 hours ago

      It’s a subsystem of Windows. Therefore, a Windows Subsystem. I don’t know what else would make sense. A “subsystem of Linux for Windows” wouldn’t make sense. They don’t call their other features “Notepad for Windows” or “Defender for Windows.”

      • Ferk@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 hours ago

        This depends entirely of what you mean by “of Windows” and what you mean by “for Linux”. This terminology is ambiguous.

        Are you a Lemmy user for lemmy.world, or are you a lemmy.world user for Lemmy?

        It’s also inconsistent because when they say, for example, “Microsoft Azure Linux Container Host for AKS”, they are talking about running a Microsoft Azure Linux Container inside of AKS, not a container that is meant to be used for running AKS within it…

      • atzanteol@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        13 hours ago

        You say “The Windows Memory Subsystem” not “The Windows Subsystem for Memory”.

        Windows Linux Subsystem would likely be most clear.

      • Zagorath@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        21
        ·
        14 hours ago

        It’s a subsystem of Windows

        If I say “the life support system for the USS Enterprise”, nobody thinks that that’s a system running on the life support that gives you the USS Enterprise. It’s a system running on the USS Enterprise that gives you life support. Windows Subsystem for Linux sounds like it’s a system running on Linux that gives you access to Windows.

        • HumanPenguin@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          13 hours ago

          If I say “the life support system for the USS Enterprise”,

          Unfortunately contact mean that example dose work both ways.

          If we say enterprise system for life support. People will also understand.

          But voyager system for enterprise could apply either way. To be fitted to enterprise or allow enterprise activity on voyager. Or voyager activity on enterprise. For is just bad language in this context.

          Here Microsoft should’ve used a possessive. Voyagers enterprise support system would be more normal.

          Or Windows Linux support system.

          But marketing and a history of no other OS matters means Mickey$oft insists on it’s own layout. Over language clarity.

      • randomcruft@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        14 hours ago

        On Windows MS may not call it Defender for Windows… but for Azure, it’s Defender for Cloud, Defender for Containers, Defender for SQL Databases, etc.

        Microsoft Defender for Cloud overview

        So really it’s just more of Microsoft’s generally crappy naming conventions… I’m looking at you Entra ID!!

        edit: added link

        🙂

      • siha@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        15 hours ago

        Does ‘Notepad subsystem for Linux’ sound to you like a Windows or Linux subsystem?

  • Xanx@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    11 hours ago

    I guess it won’t be long before someone launches Windows 3.11 Subsystem for Linux.

  • irotsoma@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 hours ago

    Sounds like they’re basically abandoning it but at least giving the code out so the community can still use and keep it up until it becomes incompatible with Windows. It is one of the few ways I’m able to get my Windiws 11 work computer to do what I need with all the security and tracking junk my company installs on our laptops, even for developers, so I hope it sticks around for a while.