Not one thing in that article, is terrible. El Reg is a tabloid and they love to stir up the muck with evocative language, I don't treat them as a serious new source these days (and I've been reading The Register since 1998 when there was some semblance of respectability - such as upsetting Apple :) ).
Right...so they dropped in Nat Friedman....a Mr Opensource... as CEO. I don't think you can get a bigger statement of their commitment to F/OSS than that.
And um ok MS need to make some cash from their acquisition maybe by pushing Azure as a platform for open source projects - hell what did you expect? If Google or Amazon Acquired Github I'd expect the same, and they'd do the same.
And you know, you as a project maintainer still have a choice. You can still deploy anywhere you like.
Microsoft aren't stupid, they've for the past ten years and more promoted the open sourcing of some of their key web dev tech (initiated by Scott Guthrie, Hanselman, Rob [thingy], and another few folks I can't remember off of the top of my head). And it's a different company now.
I hate to do the "appeal to authority" thing, but I'm 52 and lived through the "knife the baby" times. Microsoft for developers and open source are a hugely different company under Satya Nadella compared to the days of Ballmer and Gates.
Do you think that Microsoft is just doing it out of the goodness of their hearts?
And that Open Source, but especially Libre Software, is going to be compatible with whatever they have in mind ?
What have they done to GitHub that's been an act of Embrace, Extend, Extinguish? Pretty sure I'd hear it here on HN first if it was a thing. Honestly I need some evidence.
