Thanks for the added info. It helps me to understand better what is going on. I no longer have one foot in Windows, but it is good to keep up with what they are doing especially as it impacts open source.
Roy On 18 April 2010 21:05, Chris Miller <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sun, Apr 18, 2010 at 6:25 AM, Roy <[email protected]> wrote: > > I don't usually post news stories here especially about competing OSes, > but > > this one caught my > > eye: > http://www.linux-magazine.com/Online/News/Microsoft-to-Develop-own-Open-Source-Platform > > Basically MS is starting to develop its own package manager as an open > > source project. I also noted that they are using > > Launchpad. https://launchpad.net/coapp/ > > I wonder where this is headed. It is an interesting twist that Microsoft > is > > using Launchpad and that they are embracing to some degree the Linux > model > > for package management. Could they also be looking at Linux in other > ways? > > Roy > > Microsoft has for a long time lacked a good way of offering software > updates. Windows Update updates the core OS, true, but it has never > extended to other bits of software. You can upgrade to "Microsoft > Update" which can update Office, Defender, and other specific > Microsoft-brand products (through the Windows Update system), but > never has anything else been updateable through it. Third party > vendors have always had to run their own update servers and build > their own custom update services (or license someone else's). > > I think this is ultimately a move to try and create a apt-get (or yum, > or portage, or what have you) -like system for Microsoft to offer > vendors as an update solution. Microsoft has already built some of > the machinery for this in their BITS updating solution, a nifty tool > that can inspect files and upgrade/repair them to versions present on > a remote server. This is a very specific API though, and isn't too > prevalent (I've seen it used by one vendor, CCP; there could be > others, I just haven't seen them). I would imagine that they'll plug > BITS into this as a way for vendors to set up their own update > mirrors. I suppose they finally got tired of people asking to > piggy-back off of the Windows Update system for software upgrades. > > Microsoft BITS: > http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa362708(VS.85).aspx<http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa362708%28VS.85%29.aspx> > > BITS is a closed-API, so if they GPL CoAPP or whatever it is they'll > have to count on the system library exception (BITS is bundled with > Windows 7 by default now, so that will probably qualify it as a system > library). See section 6 of the GPL version 3. While this explicitly > states that system libraries aren't required for distribution with the > "Corresponding Source," I would imagine that would also exclude system > libraries from the GPL-compliance requirement. > > (The strong prerogative of the GPL to force all related code and > derivative works to be open-source in perpetuity founds much of my > disdain for the GPL, for those detecting a trend of anti-GPL talk from > me). > > -- > Registered Linux Addict #431495 > For Faith and Family! | John 3:16! > http://www.fsdev.net/ > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Linux Users > Group. > To post a message, send email to [email protected] > To unsubscribe, send email to [email protected] > For more options, visit our group at > http://groups.google.com/group/linuxusersgroup -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Linux Users Group. To post a message, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit our group at http://groups.google.com/group/linuxusersgroup
