Answer: Microsoft and DotNetNuke, Inc.

The principals of the constituent elements have a compelling interest in providing guidance that promotes a mutually beneficial co-existence. Also, reliable guidance will require knowing the future directions of each part of the platform.

To grasp the latter concept, imagine what DotNetNuke 4 would have been like if Shaun Walker had not been a frequent guest at the Redmond Asylum while MS was coming up with ASP.NET 2.0.

Porting guidance from anyone who does not have inside information on what Microsoft and DNN plan on doing with their pieces of the puzzle cannot be trusted.

Why?

Because Microsoft could just as easily subsume DNN as support it. All that has to happen is for MS to look at some market research data. They will find out that 95% of the actual DNN market does not give a rodent's hind quarters about "open source" and they'd rather have DNN as a well-supported commercial product and in that case, porting to DNN is going to be a moot point.