Clarify the proprietary distribution in the README

[resynth1943]

I'd like it if this README actually explained what the "traditional Microsoft license" is.

In relation to: #105978; #91036; #80291; #71638; #18083; #17996; #17994; #3321; #60

[resynth1943]

@chrisdias is anything wrong with this addition ...?

[chrisdias]

Hi sorry for not responding sooner.

I'm not sure this adds anything to the readme. It restates "traditional" as "proprietary" and it is a commentary ("it is not open source") on the license, where we have a link to the license.

[resynth1943]

It restates "traditional" as "proprietary"

Yes, it provides more information. "Traditional" does not provide any valuable information.

it is a commentary ("it is not open source") on the license, where we have a link to the license.

Isn't it your job to simplify this for the end-user? Who would realistically read a LICENSE? All of this "VSCode is open-source" propaganda being shared by Microsoft has successfully duped people into thinking this is not a proprietary program.

It's your role to explain what your "traditional Microsoft license" is. One assumes VSCode would be open-source after looking at this repository. If Microsoft doesn't do more to combat that, it's deceitful and harmful to the FOSS community.

Thanks.

[joepie91]

This looks like a reasonable addition to me; currently it is indeed implied that the VS Code distribution is open-source through the general marketing and perception around it (I regularly run into people believing VS Code is open-source), and it is IMO important to clearly contrast between the proprietary VS Code distribution and the open-source codebase that it is built upon.

[resynth1943]

@joepie91 Definitely agreed.

There needs to be more accountability here. This short addition explains that VSCode is proprietary software, which is a welcome contrast to Microsoft's marketing:

• "Open-source" (2019)
• "Built on open-source" (2020)

Some honesty wouldn't go amiss, it may even garner respect from the community. Instead of misleading advertising, why don't we just be tell it like it is? "This software is a proprietary build of the Visual Studio Code repository."

We need to include this on the website too. As Joe says above, too many people are of the assumption VSCode is open-source ( was in 2019), when it's actually a closed-source product. This immediately diminished my trust in Microsoft as a whole.

A very small minority read the Terms and Conditions prior to downloading this product, and I'm getting the feeling Microsoft is aware of this, and actively exploiting it for commercial gain.

Many thanks,
Resynth