Meant for developing Sharepoint/Office Apps but released under MIT License (Only the custom Microsoft Fonts are restricted but easily replaced)
It's pretty amazing that even this has generated negative comments. This is one of the reasons why I don't feel like I should ever open source any code. Anything I ever release would be something that was of use to me and maybe a few other people. Would I have to actively use and support it for the rest of my life to be "right"? I wonder how many of you complaining actually never open source anything while using lots of it.
I guess it's lame to complain about negative comments on the internet, but hacker news is supposed to be different. Open source from Google? That's fantastic. Open Source from Intel, Facebook, Yahoo, or HP? Those are OK too. Open source from Microsoft? Better make sure you've said something negative to make sure that your fan boy card doesn't get pulled.
It's not about fan boy cards, it's about the fact that MSFT visibly doesn't give a fuck about contributors or clients and will quite happily steamroll over everything whilst their marketing department fanfares repeatedly about how they're embracing open source and they love Linux.
You'll find that Open Source to Microsoft means business as usual, just on github, with added marketing fluff.
I'm actually in close contact with the Microsoft product teams that I depend on, and while I wish they only listened to me, they don't...but it's not the end of the world and it doesn't color every perception I have of them.
Even when things are quite bad and they don't have an answer I want to hear...that doesn't mean that I can use that experience as the only criteria for all of my future interactions. What about the stuff that they get right? Does that have any value?
People here go crazy about privacy and Intel's ME. They don't flip a crazy bit when Intel releases something open source or judge every product against their hatred of the management engine. Does Intel support every single project that they open source forever? How about IBM?
Sure, it would be better if they were interested in building and engaging a community (and who says they're not? It's a huge company and a lot has changed in the past few years, but fair, you don't want to take anything for granted), but releasing code, tests and build instructions under one of the most liberal licenses around is so close to the mark that no, complaining isn't really warranted.
Full motherfuckin’ stop.
The project is just us working in the open. We're not trying to push this as a new component framework for others to use, and we probably don't have the bandwidth to support external consumers, but we're happy if people can learn from it.
Disclaimer: I work on Yammer, and I've contributed to this project.
Citations for the downvoters: silverlight, lightswitch, Velocity, AppFabric, Windows Workflow, half of WCF, ...
Why just half ? :)
JK
Complaining is warranted when you are a paying customer and you are told to post a GitHub ticket which is ignored...
You can't make other people do stuff for you for free. Sometimes, as you've relayed your experiences, you can't make them do it even if you pay. At least open source gives you the option of fixing it yourself, or paying a third party of your own choice to do so.
If IBM or Intel served me a turd, I wouldn't go back again. In fact IBM served me a helping of WebSphere once and I didn't go back.
But this isn't that, and the rest of us here kinda just want to get on with it and build cool stuff and this helps us do that.
Seriously, you had a bad experience with one IBM product. Would that keep you from looking at other things they do? They do lots of amazing things and make some platforms that define the sector for solving certain kinds of problems.
No, I don't think we have the same goal, and you certainly do not come off very pragmatically.