• bitfucker@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    4 hours ago

    I never have a problem with your follow up, even if you still did not specify your intention explicitly. At least the ToS is for a plugin that is owned by MS so it provides a clue to what you’re referring to. I have a problem with your original statement.

    … A lot of the functionality is in the marketplace but non Microsoft products aren’t legally allowed to use it and you’re not allowed to distribute builds of the plugins.

    To put differently:

    A lot of the functionality is in the marketplace. Non MS products aren’t legally allowed to use it (1). You’re not allowed to distribute builds of the plugin(s) (2).

    See the problem? That statement with the follow up is accusing MS restricting your right to use MS marketplace from non MS product as a problem (1), and THEN accusing that you cannot distribute the build of the plugins from said marketplace (2) which is only true for MS owned plugins.

      • bitfucker@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        My point is, clear up your mistakes in communication. It doesn’t help anyone to spread misinformation. I hate MS as the linux guy next door, but making false accusations, intentionally or not, will make people stay away from you. Because as I stated, I immediately understand the context just from you sending ToS of a plugin owned by MS. But your accusation is different entirely than your intention.