Comment by Analemma_
7 years ago
I always heard that ReactOS had an ultra-strict vetting process, where no one who had ever so much as been within spitting distance of Redmond at some point in their life was allowed to touch the code, to support their claim of a clean-room implementation in case Microsoft ever decided to make a fuss about it. Seems like a lot of pointless effort if they actually did use leaks or university kernel releases. So either this guy is mistaken, my info about ReactOS is bad, or the project is run by people very ignorant of the law.
Why not consider the alternative that the process is just inherently flawed? (As in, it has flaws, even if its intent is good)
If I look at some leaked source code, then contribute to your project, you can't know the code is stolen unless you also look at it, which you can't do.
You can reasonably guess if a large chunk looks "unusual" but it can't ever be perfect.
I heard WINE has a rule like that but ReactOS does not.
But I also heard they borrow some code from WINE.
ReactOS had the same process.
I thought I remember reading on an FAQ a long time ago that they don't mind such contributions. Can't find it now. Could be wrong.
I myself am ex msft so that's why I was curious. I have not contributed to any of these though.
Edit: found it.
https://web.archive.org/web/20110707221707/http://www.reacto...
Section on tainted developers says: "Tainted Developers". There is a legal theory that is occasionally cited in the context of producing a work-alike implementation of a published copyrighted work. ... It is the position of the Project that this theory is invalid for a number of reasons. As a general rule, there is no reason that a developer who has seen non-free code cannot write logically similar code for ReactOS. Then talks about disclosure of NDAs.
I read that as: if you worked at MS, disclose your NDA, but it doesn't automatically forbid your contribution.