Claude Fox


Ok, this article looks fairly balanced and states that MS is seriously considering an Open Source VFP!:
http://arstechnica.com/journals/microsoft.ars/2007/04/03/developers-petition-for-the-return-of-visual-foxpro





Re: Open Source VFP?

Alex Feldstein


Not so.

Simply a misunderstanding on the part of the writer. What YAG said, to the press, and in person at the MVP Summit the day of the announcement is that SEDNA (components written in VFP, VB.NET, etc.) would be Open Source at Codeplex. The VFP core will not be released.

Take it from someone who was there. Or you could email YAG and ask.






Re: Open Source VFP?

Carl Warner

And to follow what Alex just said, the article also seems to say SP1 for VFP9 will be it for MS's efforts to VFP9. The MS Fox team is currently working (on and off) to complete SP2 for VFP9, as well as the Sedna portion. So the author of that article has seemed to miss the point on all counts. I have no idea who gave him his information or whether or not he just didn't listen when it was correctly told to him the first time.

Another article to view, if you haven't already, is this one:

FoxPro users petition to keep database language alive
http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9015920&pageNumber=1






Re: Open Source VFP?

Claude Fox

Yeah, but this article is more recent. Aren't those writers talking to YAG (or e-mailing) It's seems like there have been a bunch of articles like this that "got it wrong" Is MS possibly considering this now If it's not true, it would be nice if they made a public statement saying so (oops I forgot there's nobody left in the Foxpro division to do this)..

Here's some related articles I found just by a casual googling:

http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,2105307,00.asp
http://opensource.apress.com/article/249/microsoft-releases-visual-foxpro-under-shared-source-license
http://www.oreillynet.com/onlamp/blog/2007/03/foxpro_going_to_codeplex_ie_go.html
http://www.cyberciti.biz/tips/microsoft-foxpro-going-open-source.html
http://blogs.msdn.com/jasonmatusow/archive/2007/03/19/foxpro-going-to-codeplex.aspx
http://slashdot.org/articles/07/03/21/1548202.shtml






Re: Open Source VFP?

Carl Warner

>> Yeah, but this article is more recent.

Which article The one I referenced was from yesterday. It only reflects what was mentioned back within a day or two after the announcement was official plus the added news that Fox developers are petitioning. Nothing has changed since the original official announcement from MS.

Based on what I've seen over and over in the media, they aren't too accurate and they collate the thoughts, correct or not, from other reporters. They make incorrect information look more and more legitimate by repeating it in multiple locations, many of which you can get to through casual Googling as you just did. [I wonder what MS Live returns in its search. Smile]





Re: Open Source VFP?

Claude Fox

I'm referencing http://arstechnica.com/journals/microsoft.ars/2007/04/03/developers-petition-for-the-return-of-visual-foxpro

which is from a week ago.

I don't think it's beyond the realm of possibility that despite what YAG said at the conference, MS has since reconsidered. After all, AFAIK, YAG does not have the final say in this matter and maybe he was given instructions to investigate the possibility of fully (or more fully) opening up the source on CodePlex after he made the initial announcement. It would be nice if you MVPers could at least entertain the possibility. After all, if it turns out to be true, you might be embarrased that you thought you were so right about this...

The fact that there is no definitive word denying this is sort of telling in and of itself...






Re: Open Source VFP?

Tamar E. Granor

It's a lovely idea, but it's not going to happen. Let's look more closely at the article you cite. Here's the key part:
<quote>
In a statement to the MasFoxPro petitioners, Visual Studio group manager Alan Griver confirmed the possibility of FoxPro becoming open source software:

"For Microsoft to continue to evolve the FoxPro base, we would need to look at creating a 64-bit development environment and that would involve an almost complete rewrite of the core product. We've also invested in creating a scalable database with SQL Server, including the freely available SQL Server Express Edition. As far as forming a partnership with a third-party is concerned, we've heard from a number of large FoxPro customers that this would make it impossible for them to continue to use FoxPro since it would no longer be from an approved vendor. We felt that putting the environment into open source on CodePlex, which balances the needs of both the community and the large customers, was the best path forward."

As the above passage states, Microsoft is seriously considering releasing the FoxPro source code on CodePlex, and we will probably see it posted on CodePlex within the year.

</quote>
Here's a more complete quote of what YAG said:

<quote>
As part of my presentation at the MVP summit, I announced that Microsoft is going to make the Sedna enhancements [to FoxPro] available to the community as open source through CodePlex," said Alan Griver, group manager for the Microsoft Visual Studio Data Group, in a statement released by the company. "We appreciate the work that MVPs and community members have already been doing to enhance Visual FoxPro on CodePlex," Griver said.

"We felt that putting the environment into open source on CodePlex, which balances the needs of both the community and the large customers, was the best path forward." .
</quote>
http://www.infoworld.com/article/07/04/03/HNvsmixfox_1.html source=rss&url=http://www.infoworld.com/article/07/04/03/HNvsmixfox_1.html

This makes it clear that he's talking about Sedna, not the whole product.

Tamar




Re: Open Source VFP?

Carl Warner

So you want to argue with the facts and quote web articles that have no new facts Give it up. The definitive word was given on March 13th and nothing has changed in the less than a month that has ensued since then. And the media has done nothing new as they continue to sloppily cover stories misrepresenting the facts. Life goes on...

>> After all, if it turns out to be true, you might be embarrased that you thought you were so right about this...

I am not worried about being embarrassed. I don't embarass easily.





Re: Open Source VFP?

Claude Fox

Carl, I just read the Computer World article that came out yesterday (http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9015920&pageNumber=1) and it also is inconclusive, IMO and leaves the reader up in the air. Jay Roxe, the MS group product manager for Visual Studio (YAG's boss ) issued a statement that included: "..We felt that putting the environment into open source on CodePlex [Microsoft's open-source site], which balances the needs of both the community and the large customers, was the best path forward." He didn't elaborate any more than this and saying "putting the environment into open source" certainly sounds like more than just add-ons to me. Maybe they're purposely being ambiguous on the subject to gauge reactions Didn't MS do something similar by floating rumors when they wanted to pull the plug on VFP 10 years ago




Re: Open Source VFP?

Carl Warner

Yes, every article is inconclusive because they are only the bits and pieces of what many of us MVPs heard firsthand on March 13th right out of Alan Griver's mouth. Nothing has changed but interpretations abound. I heard nothing open to interpretation-- it was clear.

As far as the past (which doesn't matter much at this point), after MS acquired Fox Software in 1992 and FoxPro 2.5 was released with a quickie upgrade to 2.6, there was a long quiet period where rumors abounded only because MS wasn't telling and anyone that knew wasn't talking. Many mistakenly read that lull as MS bought FoxPro to kill it. Of course, it didn't happen because, when they poked their heads up from under their rocks, we had VFP3 with OOP and views and buffering, etc., and all with backward compatibility, not a simple thing to marry all of that into one package. Then we went on to fight inclusion into Visual Studio. Finally, when VFP6 came out it was part of Visual Studio. Then after that big move, it was then put back into non-Visual Studio status. MS has had a hard time making VFP fit into its overall scheme of things, as though it should be categorized like their other tools. Now, rather than make VFP fit, they choose to leave it as is.




Re: Open Source VFP?

Craig Berntson

No, they are talking to YAG unless given access by Microsoft's press firm Wagner-Edstrom.




Re: Open Source VFP?

Craig Berntson

No, Jay Roxe is not YAG's boss and YAG is not his. The press was given access to Jay, so he made the statement. That does NOT mean what Jay said is incorrect.

When Ken Levy worked on the Fox team, he reported up through Jay Roxe's organization.






Re: Open Source VFP?

Tamar E. Granor

Claude-the line you quote as being from Jay Roxe is exactly the same one I quoted as being from YAG in an earlier article that made it clear it referred to Sedna, not the core product.

Tamar