[Ironruby-core] Regarding IronRuby... How true it sounds from this blog

[Michael Letterle]

On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 1:36 PM, Peter Bacon Darwin
<bacondarwin at googlemail.com> 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