BT

InfoQ Homepage News Should LINQ to SQL Go Open Source

Should LINQ to SQL Go Open Source

Bookmarks

More and more, LINQ to SQL is being seen as a temporary solution. With the impending release of ADO.NET Entity Framework, a lot of people are worried that development on LINQ to SQL will fall by the wayside. With Microsoft's long history of developing and discarding database access technologies, these concerns are not without merit.

Further compounding the issue is that LINQ to SQL has been transferred to the SQL Data Programmability team, the very same group working on ADO.NET Entity Framework. With their own project filling a similar role, it is hard to see them wanting to devote a lot of time to the adopted project.

So this raises the question, "Should LINQ to SQL Go Open Source?" Leon Bambrick asks that question and provides some analysis. One of the biggest concerns he raises is the liability issue, wherein Microsoft may be reluctant to ship something with the framework that has had external contributions. On the other hand, it might be what's needed to push through community-driven features such as mockability and multiple providers.

Rate this Article

Adoption
Style

Hello stranger!

You need to Register an InfoQ account or or login to post comments. But there's so much more behind being registered.

Get the most out of the InfoQ experience.

Allowed html: a,b,br,blockquote,i,li,pre,u,ul,p

Community comments

  • Not completly temporary

    by Francois Ward /

    Your message is awaiting moderation. Thank you for participating in the discussion.

    LINQ to SQL is for small to "less small" (not quite medium =P) solutions... half a notch up from Typed Datasets. LINQ to Entity doesn't replace that, and its with that mindset that LINQ to SQL was developed (also as an introduction to other ORMs, to put the idea on the map).

    LINQ to SQL serves its purpose pretty well seen from that angle, so its probably fine.

  • LINQ to SQL was never even supposed to exist

    by Danijel Arsenovski /

    Your message is awaiting moderation. Thank you for participating in the discussion.

    It would be a shame if LINQ to SQL proves to be only a temporary solution; now that it has been officially released I think Microsoft has a duty to provide a decent lifecycle for this product.
    My biggest objections to LINQ to SQL are following:

    1. LINQ to SQL works only with Microsoft SQL Server

    2. LINQ to SQL is that it is no 100% POCO. Framework forces you to use System.Data.Linq.EntitySet type on "many" side of one-to-many relationship and EntityRef on the "one" side of one-to-many relationship.

    3. Single table inheritance

    These are not the only ones, but you have to give them some slack since this is the first version of the product.

    Some interesting background on LINQ to SQL origins:
    The LINQ to SQL was never even supposed to exist

Allowed html: a,b,br,blockquote,i,li,pre,u,ul,p

Allowed html: a,b,br,blockquote,i,li,pre,u,ul,p

BT

Is your profile up-to-date? Please take a moment to review and update.

Note: If updating/changing your email, a validation request will be sent

Company name:
Company role:
Company size:
Country/Zone:
State/Province/Region:
You will be sent an email to validate the new email address. This pop-up will close itself in a few moments.