If the cost was low, this would be a very different conversation and very likely a different outcome. In this case I think the community has to start the trail rolling. It is in some ways both MS's and the communities responsibility to solve that remaining client side UI issue as both parties will share the rewards. People who don't see this value are a little disconnected I think.NET Core has solved the cross platform issues in its eco system in every aspect besides the desktop and client side (no HTML is not the answer for many reasons). If these apps were using Azure it would end up making MS money in the long run. MS has at least given people a starting point if they have the resources to port it (which is far more than I expected to happen Many apps written in WPF would have great value on other platforms. There is a lot of value in a cross platform XAML that looks the same on every platform, is compile type checked, has a visual editor in an IDE and based around the. This is just how big companies work which sometimes don't see the value of innovation outside their bubbles / eco systems if you will.
Thus Its the communities responsibility to fork and port WPF and if it does have value to MS (which I would argue does) the community will have to illustrate that to MS. We have enough trouble being compatible with OpenSSL and that's just one MS is just taking the position (from my perspective) of they're not going to spend money supporting platforms they don't 'directly' make money in or is hard for them to measure the value of short term (which is a little off as they supports macOS but only for the sake it brings in Azure developers not realizing I think people need better client side tools to even use Azure ). It also allows others to stake their claim if they are passionate, with a clear sense of the engagement model with upstream. That's not a bad model, but we want to avoid it where we have a clear point of view up front. That model is potentially more friendly, but it arrives at the same product outcome. To a degree, we've voted by not applying any effort on some of those requests. We have cases where issues have stayed open for years where nothing has happened. We've also learned from our experience from CoreCLR, CoreFX and other repos.
Cross platform truecrypt alternative code#
We're also happy to take code back, should it continue to be licensed favorably and it aligns with future scenarios. We are setting the rules of engagement for this particular repo, but also licensed the code very favorably and are happy to see others use this code for scenarios that are out of scope for this repo. In fact, I think we know exactly how open source works. Exactly, We are being clear and transparent.
0 kommentar(er)
