Sorry for the bad subject, also sorry for condensing everyone's
questions into one response, but it makes it easier. I originally
started including each person's questions, but it didn't make much
sense because many of them were similar.

Thanks for all the feedback, this has been very useful.


(1) How does shared source differ from open source?
I called it shared source, because that is the usual name Microsoft
gives these projects, if we go down this path then we would have two
main goals, one that people could contribute, two that it could
continue to be used in commercial development.

(2) What will Nenad's role be?
If we do go down a shared source path, then their will be a role for
Nenad, the range and scope of that role will depend on what we are
trying to achieve and how that fits in with Nenad. In terms of
setting everything up, we have been working closely with Nenad, and
we will continue to do so. I think we would lean more towards having
a small committee (possible including external people) managing the
project as opposed to 1 central person, but that is based off intial
discussion (we haven't finalized what we will do yet).
And yes we all know what a great job that Nenad has done supporting
WTL over the years!

(3) Details about bugs, issue lists, documentation etc...
We would work to provide the community with the information they
need to be succesful with WTL. This may involve some or all of the
above (it's too early to say).

(4) Why don't you guys just incorporate it into ATLMFC?
There are many reasons why this just doesn't seem feasible to us at
the moment, maybe those reasons will change with time. Unfortunately
even though WTL "ships" and is used in large applications, there is
still work involved in productizing it, and this work is not always
as easy as it seems it should be. Take for example what platforms a
technology supports and what languages? Yes there are ways around
these issues, but each of these issues adds up.

(5) Will there be a website / project portal?
If we did make WTL shared source, then we would definately work to
put the correct infrastructure in place, this would include some way
for people to enter bugs, submit code, get status of bugs, get
developer drops and get "release" drops. If we do something like
this we would try and do it properly, which is why we are still
discussing what the right thing to do is.

(7) Will we really support it, isn't Microsoft all .NET now?
There is a very long answer I could make to this question, but let's
keep it short. Yes .NET is an important technology, we see it as
having many advantages for developers, and as being a very important
part of our platform going forward. But, the C++ team has never
encouraged or required people to migrate or port existing code
to .NET we have always seen it as another set of functionality that
the C++ developer has access to.

You can see this from the mixed managed / native development that we
allowed in 7.0, you can see our support for .NET with features like
Winforms designer support in 7.1. You can also see our commitment to
unmanaged code in the countless ways such as conformance, or the /GS
switch. And we are going to continue to make investments in ATLMFC.

Are we spending resources on .NET -> Yes.
Are we abandoning everyone else -> No.

(8) Mailing list for WTL?
As those of you who were on the ATL list know, it was my
responsibility to find a new solution for that list, which turned
into the developmentor sponsored list. We continue to work on
improving our community involvement, and making the best use of our
time, currently mailing lists are not a part of this strategy, but
this may change.

(9) Time-line for a decision?
I wish that I could produce a hard time-line, but I can't. Having
said that finding a viable long-term solution is one of our top
priorities. I hope that we can answer this question concretely in
the next 2 months.

Until we do, WTL will continue as it currently has.