Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?
Microsoft Open Source Linux

Microsoft Developer Made the Most Changes To Linux 3.0 Code 348

sfcrazy sends this quote from the H: "The 343 changes made by Microsoft developer K. Y. Srinivasan put him at the top of a list, created by, of developers who made the most changes in the current development cycle for Linux 3.0. Along with a number of other 'change sets,' Microsoft provided a total of 361 changes, putting it in seventh place on the list of companies and groups that contributed code to the Linux kernel. By comparison, independent developers provided 1,085 change sets to Linux 3.0, while Red Hat provided 1,000 and Intel 839."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Microsoft Developer Made the Most Changes To Linux 3.0 Code

Comments Filter:
  • Re:OK Fanboys (Score:0, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 16, 2011 @09:20PM (#36789974)

    By the same token, why would Microsoft contribute to the Linux kernel? They're using a fork of Windows called Windows for Windows and Windows. I agree that Apple has no reason to contribute to Linux, but still, Microsoft has showed them up :P

  • by BitZtream ( 692029 ) on Saturday July 16, 2011 @09:30PM (#36790038)

    Microsoft contributed stuff so their code would work.

    Does it make "linux" better? No.

    Does it allow THEIR code to work? Yes.

    So interoperability is bad? Thats pretty fucking funny considering the number of fanboys such as yourself that shout that MS goes out of its way to break interoperability.

    Would better interop not make Linux better? Seems rather illogical to say that Linux working better with Windows is a bad thing, since that is what you're saying I'm going to have to assume one of us is as retarded as Corky from Life Goes On, and its not me.

  • by protektor ( 63514 ) on Sunday July 17, 2011 @12:55AM (#36790842)

    Except that completely ignores the issue of Microsoft claiming that Linux violates their patents. I wonder if Microsoft employees and legal counsel for Microsoft has signed off on any patents that might be included in the module work they are doing for their own virtualization to be included in the Linux kernel. You ask me and I see absolutely no point in including Microsoft's module. They have had 2 years and done absolutely nothing with it. All the changes that were done were lots of little ones and the module still isn't ready to leave the staging area. So while the numbers sound interesting and it makes it seem like Microsoft is helping, they are actually doing squat all to get their code into a release and usable format for the Linux kernel.

    I still want to know why the Linux kernel should contain anything from a company that constantly assaults the community. A company who calls us thieves and intellectual pirates. Microsoft is going after Android OEMs saying that Linux violates their patents so they have to pay up on licensing fees. Yet Microsoft won't publicly announce what any of those patents are. In fact when Barnes and Noble called BS on Microsoft and refused to sign the NDA. It turned out Microsoft didn't sue over Linux they sued over web browsing and the interface, which is a long long way from Linux itself or even any Linux distribution.

    The Linux community should absolutely not accept anything from a company or anyone else who is active trying to put a knife in our back and running around to OEMs who work with the community and black mailing them and telling them sign this NDA so you can see the issues, but you can never tell anyone what they are. That whole thing sounds like BS and Microsoft knows if they are ever announced that the patents will be broken and then Microsoft will be on the hook for all those license payments that they may actually have to pay back.

    I want to know why the federal government and the DOJ are not looking in to Microsoft's behavior in this matter given this is exactly the same type of monopoly behavior that Microsoft does and did that got them convicted of being an illegal monopoly in the EU and the US. Microsoft has to play by completely different rules than everyone given the fact they are a company convicted of breaking the law. When you break the law everything is different for you compared to everyone else. So it may be true some other company could do this type of thing without an issue, but we are talking about Microsoft who is a convicted illegal monopoly. So they must play by different rules, and they seem to be breaking those rules and going back to their old illegal ways.

  • Re:Community Myth (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Sun ( 104778 ) on Sunday July 17, 2011 @01:44AM (#36791008) Homepage

    And then I, as lead (and often only) developer for several FOSS projects, get an email with a question, suggestion or bug report to my personal email. When I reply with "please use the mailing list", people like you, who, to them, "community" means that the lead developer needs to answer their questions directly, complain, get upset, and sometimes get downright rude.

    As a lead developer, I want a community to form. This means that I want to give all people in the community a chance to answer your question, not only myself personally.


  • Interestingly, windows boots a lot faster inside of a vm running on linux than it does on the hative hardware (seriously, give it a try)...
    If going the other way round, linux runs somewhat slower inside of a vm running on windows... The performance penalty when running in a vm on linux is much smaller.

  • by Entrope ( 68843 ) on Sunday July 17, 2011 @07:56AM (#36791958) Homepage

    This. Some of the people on LKML pointed out that the guy's floods of ~180 patches at a time grossly violated the patch submission standards laid out in Documentation/SubmittingPatches ("Do not more than 15 patches at once to the vger mailing lists!!!"). I know it annoyed me, and it seemed like a huge amount of code churn for a driver in staging. I didn't realize until I saw this story what the driver was or who the author was.

If you suspect a man, don't employ him.