Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion

Microsoft open-sources the .NET compiler

(1/2) > >>

Edvard:
.NET, Roslyn, and WinJS... Fell, meet swoop  :o


With The .Net Foundation, Microsoft Finally Bets Big On Open Source
For years, Microsoft has flirted with the open-source movement, trying to build bridges with developers that favor publicly released code over proprietary software. This week, the software giant finally made the big moves skeptics of its commitment to open source have been looking for.

--- End quote ---

http://readwrite.com/2014/04/03/microsoft-open-source-dot-net-foundation-roslyn-winjs#awesm=~oBt1l9SKUm7OPc




from CodeProject News

Edvard:
... And the slightly interesting backstory:

I've seen a number of Microsoft watchers and users postulating that this move is proof that newly minted CEO Satya Nadella is taking the company in directions that former CEO Steve Ballmer and his leadership team never would have dared go. That's a nice, neat story. But it just isn't true.

--- End quote ---
http://www.zdnet.com/microsofts-open-sourcing-of-net-the-back-story-7000028109/

40hz:
Until we see the actual license it's released under - and precisely what code is being released - I'm going to reserve judgement.

There's open, and there's "open" when it comes to software licensing. Just take a look at Java, the "open standard" that was neither because Sun Microsystems (like Frodo) couldn't bear to part with it (despite promises made) once the time came to really do it.

Maybe I'm cynical. But experience has taught me to always be on the lookout for the inevitable sucker punch any time Microsoft starts acting like a team player.
 8)  

wraith808:
It won't be as open as FOSS wants it to be to be 'open'.  It won't be as closed as it was before.  It might be good- but those two things won't make anyone satisfied, no matter how good 'good' is.

40hz:
It won't be as open as FOSS wants it to be to be 'open'.  It won't be as closed as it was before.  It might be good- but those two things won't make anyone satisfied, no matter how good 'good' is.
-wraith808 (April 15, 2014, 10:13 AM)
--- End quote ---

To me it's not so much that as I always worry about some little tricks others have tried before. Like release the libraries but not the APIs. Or open the libraries but not the language syntax or compilers, etc etc. etc.

Whatever Microsoft means by "open" I don't think anybody expects .NET to suddenly just be fully open (in the traditional sense) without some restriction or gotcha.

I personally think they're doing it to set the stage for claiming some sort of IP infringement somewhere. Because if source was made open, it only stands to reason (in Microsoft's mind) that anything remotely resembling a part they didn't release MUST have been stolen from them - or be infringing on a related patent.

Maybe they're getting ready to lower the boom on Mono (and by extension Linux) - as many of us have been expecting them to do.

Ballmer may be gone. But a company doesn't change it's mindset overnight.

So like I said, I'll reserve any judgment for now. 8)
Beware of geeks bearing gifts.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page