Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

'Shared Source' .NET Overview

Posted by timothy on from the fwiw dept.

Lisa writes: "As part of Microsoft's Shared Source initiative, the company announced Tuesday the public availability of more than 1 million lines of Windows and Microsoft .NET source code--aimed primarily at universities. I guess Microsoft hopes to slow down academic support for the open-source Linux OS. Don't know why they expect this to work, but Brian Jepson has a nice overview of this shared source release."

15 comments

  1. Close the Italics!!! by breon.halling · · Score: 2

    Please close the italics tag! ;)

    --
    "Yeah, well, Dracula called and he's coming over tonight for you and I said okay."
  2. Merely an example by jquirke · · Score: 5, Insightful

    From the Microsoft website:

    Developers interested in the internal workings of the .NET Framework can explore this implementation of the CLI to see how garbage collection works, JIT compilation and verification is handled, security protocols implemented, and the organization of frameworks and virtual object systems.

    and

    The Shared Source CLI goes beyond the printed specification of the ECMA standards, providing a working implementation for CLI developers to explore and understand. It will be of interest to academics and researchers wishing to teach and explore modern programming language concepts, and to .NET developers interested in how the technology works.

    Before people criticize Microsoft for whatever reason, and claim that this was done in Microsoft's best interest, then you are absolutely right. Microsoft, will, ultimately benefit most from this release, but so will the community.

    I guess Microsoft hopes to slow down academic support for the open-source Linux OS.

    How so? What is it about this release that suggests anything to "compete" at all with Linux?

  3. Poisoning the mindspace by mikemacd · · Score: -1, Redundant

    I think that the real reason why Microsoft is releasing some of its source code as a part of the shared source initiative, is so that they can poison the mindspace of programmers. This would give them a very sharp thin end of a wedge to combat the true open source movement.

    Consider a young programmer who has access to the Microsoft soure as a part of their education process, whether it be formal in a university or highschool or as a part of their own personal training. This programmer then wants to go and later (months or years) contribute to a GPL'd project, because their mindspace has been poisoned (enhanced?) by the Microsoft code they have seen their contribution could be claimed by Microsoft to have been influenced by Microsofts proprietary code and the Microsoft legal juggernaut would tie up the project in the courts for as long as their money lasts, since they have (according to their 2001 financial statements) 31.6 billion dollars US in Total cash and short-term investments that would be a very long time indeed!

    If you want to do real open source, do not look at the poison.

    1. Re:Poisoning the mindspace by zcat_NZ · · Score: 1, Flamebait
      Exactly what I was going to say, but you beat me too it.

      The SAMBA people have already had trouble in this area and advise ppl not to look at any of MS's shared-source code. What worries me is that shared source will be presented as 'example' code to be worked on in universities, and an entire generation of programmers will be forced to study it or not graduate. That's one hell of a wedge they can use against any Windows-interoperability OSS project.

      --
      455fe10422ca29c4933f95052b792ab2
    2. Re:Poisoning the mindspace by netringer · · Score: 2
      They warn about the "tainting"on the web page:
      One of the key considerations that went into the design of the Rotor's shared source license is that a programmer should be able to look at the Rotor source without becoming tainted. Indeed, one of Microsoft's goals for Rotor is to be a guide for anyone who implements the ECMA CLI whether for an open source or proprietary project. Nevertheless, it will be some time before open source project organizers have had a chance to form an opinion about the Rotor's shared source license. So, if you are an active contributor to a project that overlaps with Rotor, you should check with the project organizers before looking at the source code.
      --
      Ever dream you could fly? Get up from the Flight Sim. I Fly
    3. Re:Poisoning the mindspace by Dr.+Cfire · · Score: 1

      There is only one reason microsoft eould want students to learn there source code. Windows is a virus of the mind, they will never be able to program anything half decent after viewing this code. I will have to refer to a quote about another fine microsoft product. It is practically impossible to teach good programming style to students that [sic] have had prior exposure to BASIC; as potential programmers they are mentally mutilated beyond hope of regeneration. -- Dijkstra

      --
      Unix is user friendly, it's just selective with what users it wants to be friendly with.
  4. Actually... by Daftspaniel · · Score: 3, Informative

    Microsoft have released source code for years. For example the MFC Class library has the source provided with Visual Studio which helps for debugging.

  5. This might be fun, but by Perdo · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    There is always a but... Soap keeps crashing off my desktop. I can look but not edit. I guess they are just doing what we do, ask for help when our programs are buggy and need the help of the community.

    But frankly, if Microsoft needs my help, they better ask with their dollars.

    --

    If voting were effective, it would be illegal by now.

    1. Re:This might be fun, but by irony+nazi · · Score: 1

      Why are you supporting the Great /. blackout? Have you really thought it through???

      --

      Bringing irony to the Slash-masses
  6. problems with oreilly site by abdulla · · Score: 1

    i can't seem to view that page with konqueror (kde 2.2.1), hope you can fix that :)

  7. Don't look or you'll be tainted! by SteveX · · Score: 3, Interesting

    "One of the key considerations that went into the design of the Rotor's shared source license is that a programmer should be able to look at the Rotor source without becoming tainted."

    So much for that particular conspiracy theory.

    - Steve

    1. Re:Don't look or you'll be tainted! by bjepson · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Eben Moglen, general counsel to the FSF, gave the DotGNU project his opinion on the Shared Source license and tainting.

      - Brian

  8. FSF General Counsel's Opinion by bjepson · · Score: 4, Informative

    > If you want to do real open source,
    > do not look at the poison.

    Eben Moglen, General Counsel to the Free Software Foundation, told the DotGNU project that programmers will not be tainted by reading the source, so long as they don't copy any of the code.

    - Brian

  9. Nothing really.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have nothing to say. I was just told by my teacher to log in to this site, create an account and post a coment. Love to you all!

  10. Slow down Linux? by pedershk · · Score: 2, Informative

    Excuse me for asking - but I have to disagree with the author here. What does this have to do with trying to slow down the Linux OS?

    The source code that Microsoft has released (as Shared Source) is source code for the common language runtime and quite a few of the .Net framework libraries, as well as a version of the C# compiler.

    This really has nothing to do with the MS/Linux "battle" (which really doesn't exist anyway, in my opinion - at least not officially).

    --
    Henning Same Shit (TM)