1
Three years ago, I was part of a team responsible for developing and maintaining Kubernetes clusters for end user customers. A main source for downtime in customer environments occurred when image registries went down. The traditional way to solve this problem is to set up a stateful mirror, however we had to work within customer budget and time constraints which did not allow it. During a Black Friday, we started getting hit with a ton of traffic while GitHub container registries were down. This limited our ability to scale up the cluster as we depended on critical images from that registry. After this incident, I started thinking about a better way to avoid these scalability issues. A solution that did not need a stateful component and required minimal operational oversight. This is where the idea for Spegel came from.
IMO, the issue here is that Microsoft appears to have violated the MIT license requiring inclusion of the original author’s copyright notice. I think he has every right to be salty about that violation.
In your analogy, the sign on the furniture says:
Microsoft took the furniture from the curb, but isn’t telling people whom they got it from.
I agree in regards to your opinion that he shouldn’t be complaining about the fact that someone forked his project, that just the nature of the MIT license. However, I do think he is justified in being upset that the license was violated. Hopefully this gets remedied; it’s not hard nor expensive for Microsoft to add his name to the copyright notice in the license.