On Jan 26, 2008 4:51 PM, Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > CosmOS, which was in an exact inverse state, and started implementing
>
> To be clear, its Cosmos, not CosmOS.
My apologies. I was just making an assumption about casing though, as the
intended pronunciation is a bit obvious. ;-)
>
>
> > the things SharpOS had - hoping he can ride the coat-tails of mterwood
>
> Actually mostly J has been on the website etc. The core features you refer
> to are mostly done by Matthijs and I and were present before Jonathan
> joined. You are welcome to check the checkin records on CodePlex and our
> Milestones have been published for quite some time as well.
>
It appeared to be otherwise, and J didn't deny it.
>
> > to the top. And then he comes back to the SharpOS chat room last week,
> > to inform us that he (quite obviously) split for you guys, and stirring
> > up alot of negativity. Particularly by mentioning tid-bits about you
> > supposedly telling him not to tell us stuff, like the fact the he left
> > (which we aren't that oblivious), or that DarxKies has been nice enough
> > to point mterwood in good directions every now and then.
>
> I didn't tell him not to tell you. It was suggested that it might be best
> just to "leave quietly" so as not to inflame relations.
>
And see, thats a reasonable piece of advice to give him. But thats not how
he related it at all.
>
> > Well, I think managed code, as I understand how it works today, doesn't
> > have a 1988 equivalent. ;-) And I think all of us, as soon as we became
>
> You should study computer science history a bit closer then. The mainframe
> for one, and while not equivalent to todays managed code, its strikingly
> similar. Several research papers were published decades ago as well. It
> only
> took until recent times because of lack of advanced tools, and processing
> power.
>
Well, I was attempting to be vague because I know I *haven't* studied
computer science history very well.
>
> > aware of the concept, had notions of how wonderful it would be to have
> > an OS in such a form. It has been only recently, that the power of the
> > Mono corlib, and the power of Cecil, has made it feasible for .NET
> > fans. (I've personally been all over .NET since Beta 1, even though I
> > *was* in primary school - such is the niceness of an MSDN subscription
> > in the family.)
>
> It was possible before Cecil and Mono as well. And in fact its not even
> restricted to .NET. There have been ones on Java, as well as Pascal PCode
> many years ago. Although for a variety of reasons I believe .Net to be a
> superior choice.
>
I think its safe to assume that my assumptions for this (off topic)
conversation, though some based in some ignorance, are mostly there to
prevent even further verbosity.
The accusation that was ironically made against us, of being particularly
un-original, was not yours - and I shouldn't have been so specific with your
name and intents in my lashing at J - but in the precise context of what is
going on, we addressed those possibilities before Cosmos was on the radar,
per se. (Neener neener neener?)
All that aside, the frustration comes from the feeling of a few of us at
SharpOS (myself included), liking to think that we are special. Sure that
requires alot of assumptions, and we certainly don't have the right to jump
down bystanders throats over it - but given the context, I honestly believed
that some form of C# OS or another will be the next revolution in OS design
and implementation. Powerful OOP abstractions, and verifiable bytecode,
allow a whole world of possibilities in customizability, scalability, and
eventually virtualization of legacy software's requirements. And Microsoft,
with .NET, has created the best set of tools to facilitate it. And Mono
eliminates licensing restrictions that would otherwise make it infeasible.
But its all a matter of opinion, interest, and management decisions, in the
end.
>
> > community could move forward. (And even if you and mterwood had been
> > welcomed into the SharpOS board, your votes would not have swayed our
> > otherwise unanimous decision.) Instead - the community has been split.
> > And between licensing differences and what will undoubtedly unfold as
> > architectural differences, the core of our projects will be mutually
> > exclusive enough that, down the road, whichever project has more
> > popularity, will completely dilute interest in the other.
>
> I don't see it as a split. I don't see why everyone has to have the same
> vision. There are many distro's of linux - and even more notably FreeBSD
> as
> a totally separate branch. I think if anything - this further highlights
> many of our differences. You and I drastically view open source
> development
> differently. Your view is fine - but it is drastically different than ours
> and one of the primary reasons we chose not to stay active on #OS.
>
And that is specifically what I hate about *nux and cousins - wondering what
will work where. Its going to take some major hocus pocus to overcome that
if SharpOS and Cosmos differ by too much.
>
> > And despite my verbosity, and my initial tense tone - I still think
> > that if any effort is possible to work together, that it should be
> > done. But the cynical side of me says that this particular ship has
> > sailed - and that same cynicism thinks its funny seeing moitoius try to
> > catch up in a row-boat.
>
> I don't see it as so closed. I see it very likely that in the future the
> projects might again somehow work in collaboration with driver cross
> pollination, and other such facts if somehow licenses permit.
And I certainly hope so! And regardless, in the end, end-user apps that will
be developed (C# web browser, anyone?), should work both places. And of
course, on *nix and Windows too. (With no re-compiling!) So both of our
projects need to make sure we step up the level of Base Class Library
support from where Mono lets it hang. But drivers worry me. So we shall see.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
SharpOS-Developers mailing list
SharpOS-Developers@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sharpos-developers
