Why Microsoft should reveal SQL Server code

TalkBack 31 of 88:

Next »

« Previous

• Thread View
• Flat View

You write...

...almost as long as I do.

As you point out (and I did), Microsoft doesn't call its efforts "open source," hence the distinct term "shared source." Within the context of their "war" with open source, it makes sense, as they don't want to be considered an open source company in any way, shape or form. Within the context of understanding what in the heck shared source is supposed to be about, it is not. It leaves them open to the unfair charge (as I pointed out in this article) that shared source is the Andromeda galaxy to our Milky Way. That was the essence of my point in this article, that is, when I wasn't wandering around talking about unrelated personal detail (new record...three whole paragraphs of COMPLETELY unrelated nonsense).

Your point is taken, though, that the originators of the term don't want there to be any confusion between the two. Fine. That's a worthwhile point, and one worth factoring into my description of things. My reaction, however, is to avoid a style of argument wherein somebody stakes out some semantic absolutes and uses that as a reason argument must stop. That's silly, because there ARE no semantic absolutes in the english language (well, at least not as strong as programmers might like there to be).

British and American, or for that matter, Irish english are different in far more ways than spelling ideosyncracies. Words have entirely different meanings. I was staying at a friends house, and she told me "put this -unknown something- in the press." I can't remember what the first part was because of too much Guinness, and the "press" means "cupboard." Either way, I had absolutely NO idea what she was asking me to do.

That's a simple example. Living in England and Ireland involves learning how new ways of expressing things...in English.

So, it's not entirely true that Spelling differences change the syntax of a statement, not the semantics, and are wholly acceptable to me. English does NOT have coherent semantics, which places it on a different plane from programming languages, which do.

That's why I insist on the ability to use words as necessary, playing with the abstract notions people have, because that's a reality. Talking about Shared Source and Open Source in one breath is useful, because people UNDERSTAND open source, with which shared source (as demonstrated) bears a strong similarity. That's useful, and perfectly in keeping with the fluidity of human languages.

Posted by: John Carroll   Posted on: 03/01/05 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

• Building the Virtualized Enterprise with VMware Iinfrastructure VMware VMware virtualization software has been adopted by over 120,000 enterprise ... Download Now
• Building the Virtualized Enterprise with VMware Infrastructure VMware VMware virtualization software has been adopted by over 120,000 enterprise ... Download Now
• Virtualization: Architectural Considerations And Other Evaluation Criteria VMware Of the many approaches to x86 systems virtualization available in the ... Download Now