Hence why I don’t like vendor lockin.

Choice isnt a bad thing - if someone wants to write something, and people want to use it then nothing should stop them from doing so.

Of course, the issue here is that there’s a very obvious way they could use such an extension in the same old embrace and extend manner they’re famous for.

As for remoting, i’m glad to hear it’s going to be addressed - i’m curious if you’ve got any current thoughts on how?

If MS want to write a module to allow passport authentication, then by all means - the more plugins and modules the better. Remoting is something that will probably be addressed eventually, however it has provided a quick and accessible way to provide cross-network object access easily.

Because of course there’s a very obvious embrace and extend path in opensim itself with MS passport amongst other things. The issue is not so much the CLR platform but the license of the software itself.

Though, the use of .NET remoting is another problem, it’s a technical one rather than a political one.

Ultimately Java will end up winning the war, but I’ve made the argument for using C# and targeting Mono - and there’s a lot of whining and gnashing of teeth from people who don’t know better and refuse to listen!

But what do you expect from a Linux shop, eh?