I think you are right, but I also thing there is another purpose behind Microsoft's tactics.

I find it highly unlikely that Barrelfish, as crude as it is ("Barrelfish lacks most of the features of an operating system that make it usable by anyone other than systems researchers"), could contribute anything to any OS development that is currently in MICROSOFT'S own research facilities, unless Microsoft has total idiots working for it. As you point out, there is currently no repository or facility to exchange code patches or updates, or to make suggestions, which raises a red flag. And, IF Barrelfish COULD contribute to Microsoft's own OS research it would speak volumes about how poor that research is, considering how I find it more likely that Barrelfish is merely a developer trap.

I believe the name of the project gives it away. Getting FOSS developers lured into working with barrelfish would be like shooting fish in a barrel. If they are working on Barrelfish they have to take time away from FOSS, or stop working on FOSS projects altogether, i.e. become "dead" to FOSS. More likely, I believe that Microsoft's hope is that Windows developers who have, or are contemplating donating time to FOSS projects (or moving to Linux) would be lured away from Linux & FOSS by this pseudo-FOSS project.

But, for the sake of argument, let's assume that some FOSS developer did jump in, make some notable improvement or apply some advanced idea that he or she had been thinking about for some time, and contribute it to Babblefish. What benefit would they get out of it? Absolutely none. Unlike the GPL, the BSD license wouldn't require Microsoft to return those contributions back to the FOSS community, to say nothing of any advances they add to the contribution. In other words, it would EXPLOITATION AS USUAL. How many FOSS developers working on Linux projects would trade the GPL for the BSD? Very few. So, IMO, the final analysis seems to indicate that Babblefish is more likely a lure for current Windows programmers to prevent them from migrating to Linux.

And, as I've stated before, the OSI is notorious for handing out Tux suits to proprietary wolves in exchange for cash. The fact that they let the proprietary houses supervise their OWN compliance to OSI's "open source" standard is like letting the foxes guard the chickens.

You said it baby. It's all about money. The real bottom line is, we all survive. I was just thinking today; what is MS gone do next? Hell; what am I gone do next.

I am middle aged in a paradigm shift.