Once a newspaper touches a story, the facts are lost forever - Norman Mailer
|
|
|
Microsoft "Open Sauces" .NET
OPEN sauce advocates are pulling apart Microsoft's bid to Open Sauce its .net libraries.
Vole announced to a hushed world that in Visual Studio 2008 , it will introduce the capability for .NET developers to debug the .NET framework source code along with their own.
The initial release will include the Base Class Libraries (BCL), Windows Forms, ASP.NET, System.Data, and WPF. It will be carried out under Vole's Shared Source Initiative.
However as one bogger points out here the licence indicates that developers can "see" the source code, but Microsoft's not providing any means of copying it. If you find a bug you are not allowed to fix it, you have to submit it to a product feedback centre.
So not even close to Open Sauce. µ
Tags: Microsoft
Share this:
Share
To be open source you don't need to do more than show the code, it is open source. What it is not is free software.

Of course almost all open source products and licenses are much much more open than this, this is the bare minimum.
Parts Java sources were distributed on almost the same terms with JDK for ages. And they still distributed in such way as for Java 6. So the move is better than nothing for .NET developers. And if Java experience is an indicator, such move will make a life of .NET developer's significantly easier.

As for a potential trap, it is a fire-once trap that will make more damage on MS than to targets. MS will get a lot of angry developers with runtime creation experience that will make something better than .NET. ECMA CLI marketing effort will be also practically killed by such move. 

So when MS is desperate enough to fire the trap, it will have been irrelevant on the market for several years.
The real issue being raised by some is that Microsoft is attempting to subvert the Open Source community by giving a glimpse of its code, then (at a future time yet to be determined) turning round and levelling the big guns in court at anyone who can be accused of using it.
In other words, it's a "here, look at this" followed by a "oh, but you used our code - look, it's quite similar" and a lawyers and robed ones at dawn.
I find that a rather compelling argument, especially since Microsoft gave money to SCO in its misbegotten crusade against Linux. And Ballmer's track record on Open Source isn't exactly one of benevolent consideration either.
Microsoft has proven time and again that it is a carnivore, and we all know just how sneaky it can be.
Kind of reminds of velociraptors, but in the 1000-ton range.

Pascal.
Microsoft Shared Source is to Open Source, like Military Music is to music....
...evelopers can "see" the source code (...) If you find a bug you are not allowed to fix it...

So it's like "Debug our code for no money, give us your ideas and we'll "sell" it back to you

Fookin' briliant !!
Why can't we just see this for what it is? There are no disadvantages here...

I know we have to bash MS at every opportunity but I might as well add a lone positive comment. 

Carry on!
They're not actually adding anything we can't already do (more-or-less) with a dissassembly tool like Reflector.
So really it's quite a logical step to allow debugging.

I know I've examined the base libraries in the past to understand why i'm getting a particular exception (or whatever) so it'll be nice to be able to do that from within Visual Studio.
Thanks Microsoft!
You find a bug... wow your clever.
You fix said bug and push out your .NET app 

Crap it doesnt work because their .NET is still broken. Hence submit to MS for global and public dissemination!!!!

Bash MS at the right time pls, not every time.