On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 1:36 PM, Peter Bacon Darwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > I believe one of the key problems is the DLR. As I understand, it MS makes > a distinction between "important" stuff (i.e. the DLR) and "peripheral" > stuff (i.e. IronXxxx). MS wants to have complete control over the DLR and > is not interested in making it Open Source. Rather the DLR code is just > community viewable, much like the rest of the .NET framework code. I can > understand this since core .NET Framework code is central to the MS strategy > and they don't want things sneaking in the sides. >
The DLR sources are under the Microsoft Public License as well. > > Another scenario, which /M:D alludes to if I understand correctly, is to > allow the community to modify the code in the RubyForge project and then let > MS select "good" builds to check back into the Team system via the SNAP > process. That way, the community feels ownership of the project and MS get > that quality control on what finally goes into IronRuby. There are > obviously many technical hurdles to overcome before this could become > reality. In particular, there needs to be a separation of DLR from > IronXxxx, including, probably, some kind of stable release of the DLR for > the IronXxxx projects to work off. > > > At some point the DLR and the languages will have to be separated, once the DLR stabilizes to some point. I don't really think the current arraignment is viable in the long term, not from an OSS point of view anyway. -- Michael Letterle [Polymath Prokrammer] http://blog.prokrams.com _______________________________________________ Ironruby-core mailing list [email protected] http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core
