[LRUG] Chat Digest, Vol 18, Issue 22

[Ian Cooper]

>So just to be clear, you Ian are the Ian Cooper of the London. NET User Group. 

Yes

>You are a MS Certified Professional and make your living primarily doing consultancy on MS products. Is that correct? 
Not precisely. I work in-house and am not a consultant. Yes I am an MVP for C#. No you shouldn't believe that does not make me critical of MS. Yes I do use MS Tools for my job.

>None of that, of course, invalidates your opinion on IronRuby.
Thanks.

>Obviously, if you are primarily a MS developer, you are not too worried about how the licence position on DLR (Dynamic Language Runtime) ends 
>up. 
I think that is a fairly naive view of developers working with MS technologies; especially those likely to be interested in languages like Ruby.
 
>But if you are primarily an open source developer, it seems to me a dangerous route to go down, given MS's long history of trying to "embrace, >extend, extinguish" technologies they do not control.

MS has certainly had a lot of failings in its treatment of OS in the past. But what is it about MS's IronRuby strategy so far which leads you to conclude that this is happening in this case? I would say that John Lam has gone out of his to try and meet the criteria for acceptance laid out by people like Martin Fowler in his RubyMicrosoft post, or by Chad Fowler in allowing them to be hosted in RubyForge. I think it would be safer to judge on a case-by-case basis.


 
Ian Cooper
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.lrug.org/pipermail/chat-lrug.org/attachments/20070729/7d1ec1f2/attachment-0003.html>