Aren't they free to decide how their time and effort is used? Do they have some inherent obligation to work for you for free(which is what open source is)?
If you develop some piece of software, and use the open core model, I wouldn't consider you a scumbag.
You speak of them as if they were a person. Microsoft is not a person, so they indeed do not have the same rights as people do. Specifically, they can be called what they are with a far lower threshold than people, especially with the reputation they have accumulated over the decades.
I'm not totally familiar with their past actions, but you specifically called the fact that pylance is not open source (while the "pyright" core is) a "scumbag move", which is what I am arguing is unfair.
So I'm having trouble figuring out your position: is Microsoft a scumbag for not open sourcing pylance or not?
FWIW, I was, until recently, a daily user of pyright, and it's, by a million miles, the best LSP for python out there. The maintainer of pyright also contributes a LOT towards pushing forward the static typing ecosystem in python. In fact, the most recent PEP in Python static typing was initiated, drafted, and first implemented, by the maintainer of pyright[0].
Microsoft also has hired Guido Van Rossum to work on Python full time.
So I think calling Microsoft scumbags about an aspect of how they engage with the Python ecosystem is not only unfair, but totally misleading.
You again talk about individuals and individual behavior and then switch seamlessly into talking about Microsoft. Even worse, you insinuate that dislike of Microsoft behavior is equal to dislike of individual Microsoft-adjacent peoples’ behavior.
No. These things are not the same and they should never be equated.
I talked about the maintainer of Pyright (Eric Taut), and I talked about Guido Van Rossum. Both are currently salaried employees as Microsoft. The work they are doing is unambiguously enabled by the salaries that Microsoft pays them. They are not "Microsoft-adjacent", they are employed by Microsoft.
If one wants to evaluate Microsoft's moral standing with regards to their participation in the Python ecosystem, one must take into account the work done on the Python ecosystem by Microsoft's salaried employees, in their working hours, no?
Aren't they free to decide how their time and effort is used? Do they have some inherent obligation to work for you for free(which is what open source is)?
If you develop some piece of software, and use the open core model, I wouldn't consider you a scumbag.