On Fri, Sep 14, 2007 at 12:57:15PM +0900, Michael T. Richter wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-14-09 at 10:36 +0900, Konrad Meyer wrote:
> 
> > Quoth M. Edward (Ed) Borasky on Thursday 13 September 2007 06:26:43 pm:
> > > Chad Perrin wrote:
> > > > On a similar note: The idea of open source software being built on closed
> > > > foundations sounds a lot like what has been going on with open source
> > > > development in Java for several years.  Despite this, I don't really see
> > > > people complaining about the closed foundations represented by the Java
> > > > VM.
> > > Yes, but after years of negotiations with literally hundreds of
> > > stakeholders, Sun was able to open those foundations. Perhaps a similar
> > > thing could happen with CLR.
> > 
> > It's Microsoft. Unlikely.
> 
> Of course someone could just make a GPLed version of the CLR, seeing as
> how it's standardized and all:
> http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/standards/Ecma-335.htm.

. . . or better yet, an implementation with a better license than the
GPL.  (Why exactly does everyone always assume that "open source" must
mean GPL?)

-- 
CCD CopyWrite Chad Perrin [ http://ccd.apotheon.org ]
Marvin Minsky: "It's just incredible that a trillion-synapse computer could
actually spend Saturday afternoon watching a football game."