Garrett Serack - Open Source on Windows and the CoApp Project

I enjoyed this presentation. As a developer who lives in both worlds, I think that CoApp is a very, very, very important milestone for Windows. I'd love to see it working.

BTW, I also liked the style of your presentation, I think you might like to take a look at Prezi before making your next presentations

Thanks,

Thanks!

I've played with Prezi ... it's a lovely tool. I nearly went that way for this presentation, but I couldn't get the results I wanted. I'll probably look at it again this fall when I do some new stuff. I have a fantastic idea that I'd like to try out, and I think it'd work really really well with Prezi.

G

Very good presentation.  It sounds like they have the right man for the job.  Microsoft should have done this years ago...

Comment removed at user's request.

Is this better than CodeProject solution where I download the source code and have them explaining the thing in their web page? Anyway, I hope they make install manager mandatory to most of apps. I don't like those Google installer that doesn't unsinstall their toolbar when I tell them to. The main thing I want is to install/uninstall without those evil developers purposly using buggy uninstaller to prevent their software to be removed, or worse, doing malicious changes to other application's settings. Which happened a lot on IE and increasingly on FF.

I am fine with CodeProject kind of code sharing. Code + demo + tutorial. All the rest is actually too much confusion for me.

a good presentation and a lofty goal, but it seems to me that the solution cannot be scalable beyond a few projects without convincing open-source project maintainers who are currently focused on linux/autoconf to adopt an additional build/packaging process when cygwin/mingw/autoconf is sufficient. 

also, bing: NDesk.Options

Wow, cool. I really hope this thing get flying!

An I wish that such a package / update-manager is also used for commercial software. I really hat to have 10 different update routines for different application or even need to manually update stuff.

Great Presentation.  All of these features would be useful for closed-source application development as well.  Windows IT staffs have to deal with Abode updates and every other application vendor's updates.  It ends up being a huge burden.  All video drivers still require a reboot. No one uses the winsxs correctly, even the VC10 team stopped using it, I think.  

This would be useful for porting internal code as well. Dependencies on externally developed libraries, despite permissive MIT and BSD licenses, require crazy build procedures for the same reasons.

I would open-source more of my smaller projects if the signing, distribution, and packaging was this easy.

More importantly let's get this to ship with windows.

@benyaboy -> You are correct on all accounts... Really, there isn't anything about CoApp that can't work for commercial software as well. 

And, yes, the VC10 team abandoned use of WinSxS. I'm not thrilled with that, even knowing the problem that WinSxS caused VC8 and VC9.  They could certainly have solved the problem a different way, but ... they chose their path.

Our goals are to make everything as trivial as possible; I sure expect that we'll see this being used everywhere.

heh-heh... shipping with Windows is a bit tricker. However, the core CoApp-Engine will install when you install any package that is built for with CoApp. All it takes is one.

When I presented this at OSCON, one of the guys that work on the build for FireFox was there. He was quite excited by the end of it, and when we've got the right parts ready, I suspect we'll even see FireFox distributed with CoApp.

Superb presentation. Looking forward to seeing this crystalize.

> Why do people use Linux?

Because it's free, duh! but also because the kernel and almost all components are open source, also duh!

Open source means for instance:

1. When you find bugs and the devs refuse to fix them by replying "by design", "wait for next big version" (usually few years away), etc.. etc..

you can just fix the bugs yourself.

2. When functions lack proper documentation ( yes msdn i'm looking at you! ) you can just go and look at the source code. simple isn't it.

So many good reasons why open source is best.

So the solution is: make windows open source :o also duh!

ah you microsoft:ise you never solve the problems you just workaround them. (workaround example: Windows , WinSxS, etc.., it's a mess)

A workaround is never a solution. It's there as a stop gap, a temporary solution for customers in wait for the proper solution.

( side note: since windows 7 is out, how about making windows xp open source, it's a start at least )

Watching this video makes me think:

Sounds like microsoft wants to lure open source devs to windows

Why can't the no ReStart mechanism be integrated into or applied to normal windows updates?

This begs the question If it is possible, why aren't Microsoft using it?

"1. When you find bugs and the devs refuse to fix them by replying "by design"

Legacy Products.

Its time ditch the millstone around dragging down innovation and development.

Pass the torch to the next generation of developers, so they can guide use into the future.

No legacy, No constraints, the freedom to  Inspire. 

Sounds good.  I did not hear Powershell at all.  Your probably already doing this, but  I would make sure all tools are cmdlets (i.e. add-package, list-package) and follow their naming conventions.  Meeting with powershell guys?  As a side thought, as long as your cracking open code and doing tracing and perf, it would be cool to be able to insert Rx QObservable hooks for perf and counters in a generalized way (if possible).  This could allow another value add under the windows platform.  To be able to compose over live apps with perf/counter data using linq and rx QObservables would be cool even if app does not explicitly expose anything.  I guess the question then becomes what data is interesting and how to figure that out in general.

@Staceyw ... I'd like to have all the functionality exposed as Powershell--all the client tools are being built against a common toolkit (written in c#).  I haven't seemed to wander across anyone who has an interest and ability to build Powershell cmd-lets yet, but once the toolkit is done, it should really be a walk in the park, and I think we'll find someone to kick in the time.

Garrett, I paused the video and jumped over to VeriSign the moment you mentioned that they'd be offering free code signing certs to valid OSS projects, but can't seem to find any mention of this offering.

All-in-all I think this is a fantastic precedent for Windows, and I'm anxious to see it take shape.

I can't remember when I was last as excited about a project as about CoApp. As someone who had to compile gzip, libiconv, SQLite3, boost myself for a project in the past, and now in the process of compiling other libraries (libao and glib), CoApp seems like a blessing.

A scenario I also thought about is to allow for Visual Studio users to very easily use 3rd-party libraries provided through (not only) CoApp. See my feature request for Visual C++: https://connect.microsoft.com/VisualStudio/feedback/details/594909/c-easy-using-of-3rd-party-libraries

Thanks for your work! I can't wait for CoApp to become available and used