text
stringlengths
0
1.17k
[1205.04 --> 1210.58] that everybody has to use right and then you have asp.net which is uh essentially the um the modern
[1210.58 --> 1216.10] web uh framework that's just on top of dotnet core as well as the full framework as a as a runtime
[1216.10 --> 1221.12] option and then you have entity framework and you have uh the you know the rost and compilers which
[1221.12 --> 1225.72] are not on github yet they're on complex still and so the all these things in combination are
[1225.72 --> 1231.54] effective with the dotnet platform and um asp.net basically when they started developing uh asp.net
[1231.54 --> 1236.58] five they already knew that they would go open source entirely so they started pretty much uh you
[1236.58 --> 1241.12] know working on github from day one versus on our side as i said we you know dotnet core is still
[1241.12 --> 1247.08] something that is in our internal servers and we're extracting it as we go and so um i think that
[1247.08 --> 1251.96] should cover what's on github now as far as the dotnet framework goes we essentially have two stacks
[1251.96 --> 1257.34] and right now if you go to the dotnet uh blog i just published a blog post about dotnet core and
[1257.34 --> 1261.90] how it relates to the full framework so you can think of dotnet essentially our side as being two
[1261.90 --> 1267.18] stacks one of them is the is the dotnet framework which is the you know you know full flavored stack
[1267.18 --> 1272.32] that we shipped you know 15 years ago uh and uh that is the one that actually includes you know
[1272.32 --> 1276.82] desktop scenarios it includes web scenarios it includes uh pretty much every scenario the developer ever
[1276.82 --> 1281.44] wanted and then on the other side you have dotnet core which is which is essentially a fork
[1281.44 --> 1285.78] and so the question is why do we have a fork and the the the reason really is it has to do with
[1285.78 --> 1291.62] our ability to evolve that stack so that in core is essentially a stack where factoring concerns and
[1291.62 --> 1297.40] modularity was a key concern from day one versus dotnet framework was never a concern as far as
[1297.40 --> 1301.20] deployment goes because you know the dotnet framework was designed to be deployed with windows
[1301.20 --> 1306.70] as one monolithic entity so factoring was never really a concern but now when you think about the you
[1306.70 --> 1313.22] know the breadth of devices and uh the the scale that it has to um um has to do then the question
[1313.22 --> 1317.18] really becomes how do we ensure that we have the same architecture and can evolve this thing over
[1317.18 --> 1320.96] the time and so when we did dotnet core we really focused on that and that's why we have two stacks
[1320.96 --> 1326.96] today and uh as far as open source goes one of the one of the key things that that we need to focus
[1326.96 --> 1331.80] on is being able to not just release source on a regular cadence but also take contributions back
[1331.80 --> 1335.84] and i think an open source product isn't really an open source product unless you can really involve
[1335.84 --> 1340.44] the community which obviously involves you know bug fixes and spec reviews but it also involves
[1340.44 --> 1345.12] actually taking code and so the dotnet framework because it ships with windows it's you know pushed
[1345.12 --> 1350.32] out by windows update there's a super high compact bar for that and the problem is once you ship on 1.8
[1350.32 --> 1356.00] billion machines it's really no longer about whether you fulfill your contract it's also about the fact
[1356.00 --> 1360.72] that do you fulfill the implied contract because when you have apps running in that you know at that
[1360.72 --> 1366.16] you know sheer size then there's a lot of like implicit dependencies so even for us it's very
[1366.16 --> 1370.48] hard to evolve the full framework at this point because every time you make a change there's this
[1370.48 --> 1375.38] trade-off between oh did this break somebody or not and the dotnet core stack is completely designed
[1375.38 --> 1381.56] to be app local so from our point of view it's very easy to actually take contributions on on dotnet core
[1381.56 --> 1386.40] because it's very easy to reason about what happens if we take that source code and so that's why
[1386.40 --> 1390.48] dotnet framework um you know we released parts of it that corresponds to all
[1390.48 --> 1395.92] core stack as open source on github in the sense that it's an open source compliant license so it's
[1395.92 --> 1400.56] all using the the mit license but we don't run it as an open source project so we don't take
[1400.56 --> 1405.60] contributions back on the full framework stack uh from our point of view the the real open source
[1405.60 --> 1411.76] strategy is on dotnet core and that's where the focus of attention is all right let's pause the show
[1411.76 --> 1415.92] just a minute give a shout out to a sponsor i want to thank top top for their support of this show
[1415.92 --> 1421.68] you know besides my personal experience with top top pure charity uh as many of you know who've
[1421.68 --> 1426.88] been listening to the show a while and those who are new uh i work at a non-profit called pure charity
[1427.44 --> 1433.52] and earlier this year we had a huge need for uh several ruby developers and within a matter of
[1433.52 --> 1438.40] weeks top to helped us find some of the best and we still have them on our team some of the best
[1438.96 --> 1444.08] ruby on rails developers we could ever find this show in particular we're talking about dotnet we're
[1444.08 --> 1448.88] talking to the team at microsoft behind dotnet core effects being open source and what they're
[1448.88 --> 1453.60] doing with the dotnet framework but even you as a as a developer or someone out there who's trying
[1453.60 --> 1459.44] to hire a developer uh to join their team go to top top.com they'll take great care of you you can
[1459.44 --> 1464.80] freelance this developer you can hire dotnet developers the full gamut top top.com tell them
[1464.80 --> 1472.24] the changelog sent you so dotnet core you said the the term bco i translated as his base class license
[1472.24 --> 1477.92] or sorry um base class library my bad i was uh stuck on your word of license back there for a
[1477.92 --> 1483.52] second but am i right to assume that when you say base class library okay so you use the term bcl there
[1483.52 --> 1490.08] to talk about dotnet core um and you use the word forked too so to slow down a bit for the listeners who
[1490.08 --> 1494.96] are like just probably like i am like asking a bunch of questions as they're listening to you or um
[1494.96 --> 1503.20] um is is dotnet core then a fork of of the framework then and will there be will there be a second
[1503.20 --> 1506.88] version of the framework that's sort of open source and the dotnet framework that's sort of
[1506.88 --> 1513.92] proprietary and closed source that you control that's that's kind of the model except that uh you
[1513.92 --> 1518.32] know as i said the dotnet framework is super large but it also has client technologies like winforms and
[1518.32 --> 1525.20] wpath on top but there's certainly also the bcl part in the full framework as well and so when we
[1525.20 --> 1529.60] when i said fork i mean you can think of it we took the sources in the full framework and just
[1529.60 --> 1534.80] packaged it slightly differently for dotnet core and so one thing we did for example is uh changing the
[1534.80 --> 1539.84] assemblies themselves or the you know physical files that actually contain the the binary code and
[1539.84 --> 1544.24] that is basically done in order to support the new factoring goals and that required some changes to
[1544.24 --> 1550.96] the source so um from that point of view there are some differences in the in the api sets but we
[1550.96 --> 1556.16] still are fully committed on keeping a story where you can basically create libraries that run on either
[1556.16 --> 1560.72] side so you can only create a library that runs on full framework as well as dotnet core so there is
[1560.72 --> 1568.00] a compatibility story between the two stacks but as far as evolution goes you can think of it as similar to
[1568.00 --> 1572.88] the you know to open source in general where you basically have uh you know the the latest hot
[1572.88 --> 1576.72] stuff is you know whatever the latest commit in the repo is people can download this build it locally
[1576.72 --> 1582.56] and run it then the next step on our side is we release open source uh pre-packaged as a bunch of
[1582.56 --> 1586.72] new get packages and so we ship these package every once in a while when the team that owns the particular
[1586.72 --> 1591.76] component you know test that component and signs off of that but that's a you know per component thing
[1591.76 --> 1596.48] and then the next step is basically we take a bunch of new get packages and effectively do the same thing
[1596.48 --> 1600.24] that open sources with distributions and we basically take a whole bunch of packages together
[1600.24 --> 1605.44] and say this is the next version of dotnet core and so a fourth step conceptually is it's porting
[1605.44 --> 1610.24] these you know this you know the the innovation that happened on dotnet core back to the full
[1610.24 --> 1615.76] framework and that is like just from a machine engineering if yeah effort that is always somewhat
[1615.76 --> 1620.88] lacking behind because as i said touching full framework is hard we take our responsibility on
[1620.88 --> 1626.64] compatibility extremely seriously so we don't just roll the latest build out and so that that requires some
[1626.64 --> 1631.60] some some some delay essentially and so from that point of view the the core pieces of it are
[1631.60 --> 1634.80] available as open source on the on the full framework but not everything is
[1636.48 --> 1641.04] do you have that written down somewhere because uh my head's spinning a little bit it sounds like a lot
[1641.04 --> 1646.56] of process maybe your direct customers probably follow that a little better than i did but it seems like
[1646.56 --> 1652.48] um perhaps some clarity on exactly how it all works do you guys have that documented anywhere or
[1652.48 --> 1656.96] somebody who wanted to get involved could go and say okay here's how here's what i can contribute with
[1656.96 --> 1662.56] with here's the stuff i can't here's how it all gets shipped is that anywhere yeah so as i said like
[1662.56 --> 1666.96] there's basically two blog posts on our side that basically summarize them up there there's one on
[1666.96 --> 1672.80] dotnet core open source which is uh about two weeks old and then just today i published a blog post on
[1672.80 --> 1677.44] what is dotnet core and how it relates to the full framework um and you know what are the what are
[1677.44 --> 1682.24] the differences between the two and how do we think about that gotcha awesome now i'm sitting here you
[1682.24 --> 1687.68] said the word forked and this might be a fun tangent um you guys got some forks out here
[1687.68 --> 1694.96] on your guys's microsoft page you forked redis you forked node you forked docker uh safe to assume that
[1694.96 --> 1700.96] you guys are building technologies on top of these open source projects uh in-house uh well this is rich
[1700.96 --> 1706.64] again there's probably a little bit of clarification that's be useful here okay uh so there's actually two
[1706.64 --> 1714.64] github well actually there's multiple github orgs okay um that we're using microsoft the microsoft
[1714.64 --> 1723.44] org is the main github organization that microsoft is using um as you might guess and so there's teams
[1723.44 --> 1729.76] that we're like we don't even know anything about necessarily that operate in that org and so you said
[1729.76 --> 1737.92] you know someone for redis um we actually have no clue um about that yeah i mean obviously we could