The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

I will be posting more about the changes to the ObjectSpaces release plans in the near future- but in the mean time, I wanted to make sure everyone was aware of that we are willing to listen to any and all feedback about the changes.  The following lists all the avenues to do so:

1.  Email the feedback alias:  This will be seen by multiple members of the WinFS program management team.

2.  Comment on my blog.  I review all comments posted to my blog.

3.  Email me directly:  I am always perpetually behind with my email, but I read everything eventually.

If you are at TechEd this week, you have a couple of additional options:

4.  Come to the Data Access booth and ask for myself or Luca.

5.  Come to Luca's O/R talk on Thursday.

6.  Visit us in the Sql Server cabana for our scheduled times.

7.  Attend the O/R BOF on Tuesday night at 6:30.

I am ready for all feedback.  The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly.


Comments (16)

  1. Lachlan James says:

    Does this mean we have to wait 2 or more years again? I think OS should be released with .NET 2.0 regardless of whether it is going to be mreged with winFS.

    And if we do have to wait, I would hope that OS has more features built in like support for more database vendors.


  2. Wolfgang says:

    +1 for a v1 release with .NET 2.0. You guys need to get this right the first time. Take the opportunity to learn what you are doing wrong by releasing it now, not when Longhorn depends on it. If MSFT can’t spare the resources for this, I’d go with a community drop and resulting OS application block as Scott suggests…

  3. Frans Bouma says:

    As a community drop would be equal to an open source system, support wise and money wise, why are you, the people who want objectspaces to be a community release, not using these open source tools? There are a couple, some have more features than Objectspaces in its current state.

  4. Daniel Pratt says:

    +1 for release with .NET 2.0 or soon after. Frans, I’ve looked at several open-source O/R mappers, and I still feel that OS is better for me. Although I know it’s not in your best interest to promote other O/R mappers, I’d be interested to know which one you would choose given my criteria:

    – No base class requirement

    – OPath or similar query language

    – GUI mapper

    – Doesn’t try to do everything. I’d prefer to manage transactions, security, etc. with COM+

    – Free

    Of course, if you don’t think any of the above are valid, I’d be interested to know that, too.

  5. Kevin Dente says:

    I vote for the WSE/Indigo model. Get it into people’s hands, unbundled from the core 2.0 framework and with a limited support lifetime.

  6. Scott Witter says:

    +1 vote for a community drop

    +1 for Kevin suggestion

  7. Jason S. says:

    +1 for Community Drop

    Andrew: This took courage, thanks for caring about the community opinion.

    Frans, I almost went with your mapper. It’s an excellent piece of software at a great price. I went with a codebase that was very similiar to OS syntax (WORM). One, it was near free, two it didn’t require an inheritance model and three it paralleled thinking from Redmond. I’m not sure about #3 now but at the time it held weight with the team.

  8. Dave Goldstein says:

    After just convincing my client to adopt OS for our project, with a release 1H next year, I’m really wanting to fall off the face of the earth now…

    …not to mention, nobody ever gets these things 100% right out the door, nobody.

    +1 on community release…

    …and Kevin’s suggestion is fair.

  9. Kevin Daly says:

    +1 on community release.

    I hate to be so "me too" but I find myself agreeing with an uncharacteristically large number of people…

  10. Mark Woods says:

    +1.0 on community release…

  11. Mark Woods says:

    actually, since there are 3 versions of the same concept going thru MS(OS, MBF, WinFS, right?), just bundle em so we can bang on the one that fits our needs.

Skip to main content