GNOME 2.14.3 is now released, a bug fix version of the current stable tree. You can find the changelog, build scripts and download locations here. In other related news, GTK+ 2.10.1 was recently released, the pyGTK-based multi-track studio Jokosher 0.1 was released and the very popular Windows HTML editor HTML-Kit is currently being re-written in Mono and GTK#.
GNOME 2.14.3 Released
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
Wow on HTML-Kit.
Does the Windows version use .NET or they are just using Mono for the Linux version?
I think that this is only for the Linux version.
If that is the case this prove the reliability of Mono as development tool.
And what Im really loving is that there is no Make or anything to compile to install it just untar it.
mkdir ~/hkt
cd ~/hkt
tar -xzf hktools.tar.gz
couldn’t be more easy.
Edited 2006-08-02 23:51
Indeed. The conversion of a program that almost no one has heard of to Mono/GTK# proves the reliability of said technologies as development tools.
Indeedio.
>of a program that almost no one has heard of
HTML-Kit is one of the most successful Windows HTML editors ever.
“>of a program that almost no one has heard of”
HTML-Kit is one of the most successful Windows HTML editors ever.
Well, I’ve heard of and used HTML-Kit before and I used it many years ago even if few around here seem to. Fairly popular by all accounts.
However, that wasn’t the original poster’s point. His point was that it doesn’t in any way prove the reliability of Mono in any way.
I also find it strange that this isn’t a port of a Windows version using a common .Net codebase. It’s a version of HTML-Kit written from scratch, and I just wonder how feasible it’s going to be to maintain completely separate codebases, especially when you want to fix bugs and apply new features in both. I hope someone didn’t do it just because they thought it would be a cool thing to do……..
Never heard of HTML-Kit neither. I wonder where Eugenia gets her ‘very popular’.
I know HTML-Kit for years. It IS very popular among Windows users. And here’s CNet’s page for it: http://www.download.com/HTML-Kit/3000-2048_4-4687625.html?tag=lst-4…
And all this time I thought you put this site together with vi 🙂
Could be a lot easier, example:
emerge mono
Does anybody know where I can get packages for Ubuntu Dapper??
Your question will be well answered on an Ubuntu forum, as well as the GTK# channel probably.
I hope it will help you.
deb http://ftp.gnome.org/ubuntu/dists/dapper/ universe multiverse restricted main
deb http://ftp.gnome.org/ubuntu-updates/dists/dapper/ universe multiverse restricted main
I think that these should work
I just updated, and got gnome 2.14.3
yea.. me too now very groovey
never heard of it
HTML-KIT that is, I have heard of gnome – ROCK ON!
I’ll repeat my what I said earlier about Mono. People should not be pushing mono, especially for any GNOME apps, and should reject mono based apps for inclusion with GNOME. Link below explains
http://tsumelabs.com/articles/GNOME_and_the_new
Mono does NOT work well on BSD, or many other OSes besides Linux. Even then mono has problems in some areas, mostly of NOT IMPLEMENTED code which throws exceptions.
Yes, GNOME is doing well on FreeBSD. There is work and code for the HAL type system.
Mono needs to clean up its act first and start trying to be portable before trying to get included in multi-OS projects. Not all the code which works on mono will always work on microsoft .net, making code more difficult to port. There have been applications from the past which have been ported from larger gtk apps to mswin. Evolution is an example, not sure what happened with the evolution on windows project. There isn’t a decent GTK# build for the latest Microsoft .NET compiler, making it REALLY difficult to port apps.
My peace said. Please reply in an orderly way, thanks.
‘ll repeat my what I said earlier about Mono. People should not be pushing mono, especially for any GNOME apps, and should reject mono based apps for inclusion with GNOME. Link below explains
The question is, who are you to tell “people” what to push or not to push. Try to give your opinion without trying to order people around. You are in no position to tell people what to do anyways.
http://tsumelabs.com/articles/GNOME_and_the_new
The IRC log….Novell has limited resources and it doesn’t make sense for them to spend a bunch of time on platforms other than Linux. That’s what they sell.
Not all the code which works on mono will always work on microsoft .net, making code more difficult to port.
de Icaza has always said that the point of Mono is to bring a modern, clean development environment to Linux. WORA has never been the primary concern.
Evolution is an example, not sure what happened with the evolution on windows project.
de Icaza just blogged about it. There’s a recent build. I tried it out, but at a 50 meg download, 120 or so on disk, and tons of Gnome processes running to support it, I decided to use Thunderbird at a svelt 6 meg or so.
The bottom line is that we live in the real world and not every platform under the sun can get the kind of attention that some people think they deserve. There’s just a limited number of resources.
But as Mono does get more popular on the desktop, we can expect that other platforms will get more attention. After all, at least they’re all Unix for the most part.
Novell has limited resources and it doesn’t make sense for them to spend a bunch of time on platforms other than Linux. That’s what they sell.
At a time when some people are discussing and pushing for Mono to be a part of Gnome I think you’ve just come up with a reason why it shouldn’t be used.
de Icaza has always said that the point of Mono is to bring a modern, clean development environment to Linux. WORA has never been the primary concern.
Well yes it is, otherwise what’s the point of porting .Net unless you can use lots of existing .Net code – preferably without recompiling? Strangely, people always come up with this ‘Oh, it’s purely a development environment for Linux’ and compatiblity with .Net always ends up being a concern because that’s Mono’s only selling point.
At a time when some people are discussing and pushing for Mono to be a part of Gnome I think you’ve just come up with a reason why it shouldn’t be used.
Some Gnome apps (and that’s what we’re talking about here) already rely on linux features such as inotify. FreeBSD already has good Mono support and the rest of the platforms are anklebiters when it comes to the desktop. Well, they all are compared to Windows.
Well yes it is, otherwise what’s the point of porting .Net unless you can use lots of existing .Net code – preferably without recompiling? Strangely, people always come up with this ‘Oh, it’s purely a development environment for Linux’ and compatiblity with .Net always ends up being a concern because that’s Mono’s only selling point.
Sun myth number #1 is that Metal L&F was going to be a great thing. Nobody buys that anymore. Sun myth #2 is that crossplatform bytecode is the holy grail. Most major Java app has native bits anyway – most noteably the installer. If it’s bytecode crossplatform then that’s gravy. But it’s open source anyway, so that’s not the primary concern.
The huge benefit that Gnome will get is that there will huge numbers of .NET libraries that will need little or no motivation to re-use.
But you already know that. You use KDE, push KDE, hate Ximian, hate Mono. So we know what your motivations are.
Some Gnome apps (and that’s what we’re talking about here) already rely on linux features such as inotify. FreeBSD already has good Mono support and the rest of the platforms are anklebiters when it comes to the desktop. Well, they all are compared to Windows.
It’s important for the wider community of contributors to have an open source project to be spread as far and wide as possible and get the resources it needs. It is perfectly possible to have Linux specific features without throwing your lot in with it so Gnome can run very well on FreeBSD, Solaris and other Unixes.
But then again that’s a problem I’ve found with some, but certainly not all, people involved around Gnome – they have this incredible excitement about gaining market share first at the expense of everything else. Everyone else is just an ankle biter.
Sun myth number #1 is that Metal L&F was going to be a great thing. Nobody buys that anymore.
And?
Sun myth #2 is that crossplatform bytecode is the holy grail.
And? Oh, and Mono has been pushed heavily as a way of creating cross platform apps. It’s not exactly the greatest thing in the world for doing so.
Most major Java app has native bits anyway – most noteably the installer. If it’s bytecode crossplatform then that’s gravy. But it’s open source anyway, so that’s not the primary concern.
And what’s that got to do with my comment you’ve quoted? You’ve descended into some gibberish there.
The huge benefit that Gnome will get is that there will huge numbers of .NET libraries that will need little or no motivation to re-use.
The point was that if Mono can’t be interchangeable with .Net easily, and it isn’t, then the advantages of having lots of Windows applications that can potentially be ported easily is fairly meaningless. My point was when that is pointed out people then lapse into ‘Oh, but we get a great development environment’. The only point in Mono at all is creating some excitement for Windows developers to move over.
It’s highly debatable whether that’s happening, otherwise it would have been just as easy for the open source community to create something new and separate from .Net that might take some of the good things from it, Java, Python and possibly Ruby. That would have been the sensible option.
You use KDE, push KDE, hate Ximian, hate Mono. So we know what your motivations are.
I haven’t mentioned KDE once here, I haven’t mentioned a hatred of Ximian and the legal pitfalls I have pointed out with Mono elsewhere are perfectly real. I notice you didn’t reply to them. I have also outlined why I’m hugely sceptical of things like the .Net language neutrality argument, the supposed advantages and the hype behind it – and I notice that Alan Cox outlined that better than I have several years ago:
http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnome-hackers/2002-February/msg00039…
Do try and stick to the topic being discussed rather than lapsing back into the usual and predictable rubbishing.
The point was that if Mono can’t be interchangeable with .Net easily, and it isn’t, then the advantages of having lots of Windows applications that can potentially be ported easily is fairly meaningless. My point was when that is pointed out people then lapse into ‘Oh, but we get a great development environment’. The only point in Mono at all is creating some excitement for Windows developers to move over.
This is shortsighted at best. Mono has clear value beyond Windows compatibility. Like .NET, Mono offers a common platform for developers to target using the languages they are most familliar with. New languages can also take advantage of existing platform support and interoperability rather than starting from scratch.
Windows compatibility via re-implementing proprietary APIs should be a secondary goal (or even a non-goal) as you’ll never legally achieve 100% compatibility. There will also always exist differences between platform APIs just as there are today (Linux, Win32, Cocoa, etc.). Attacking the problem of compatibility from that direction makes little sense. If Mono contributors provide more cross-platform APIs like GTK#, however, developers interested in cross-platform development will have a clear choice either in porting their apps to Mono (less porting time required to support multiple platforms), or developing from the start using the cross-platform APIs so they only need one codebase to maintain for multiple platforms (Windows, BSD, Mac, Linux, Solaris, 32/64-bit, etc.), including niche platforms that can gain application support simply by porting the runtime.
The only point in Mono at all is creating some excitement for Windows developers to move over.
Not really.
It’s important for the wider community of contributors to have an open source project to be spread as far and wide as possible and get the resources it needs. It is perfectly possible to have Linux specific features without throwing your lot in with it so Gnome can run very well on FreeBSD, Solaris and other Unixes.
It’s important for Gnome to get a modern platform for development. Developers and users have already spoken. The developers are producing Gnome apps with Mono and the users have said that these are the apps they want in Gnome. The resources are the developers, and if there wasn’t demand then the Gtk# bindings wouldn’t have been accepted. RedHat and Sun could’ve been producing these Java-Gnome apps that the community wanted, but they didn’t.
But then again that’s a problem I’ve found with some, but certainly not all, people involved around Gnome – they have this incredible excitement about gaining market share first at the expense of everything else. Everyone else is just an ankle biter.
Your sudden concern about Gnome is amusing. More on that later.
Sun myth #2 is that crossplatform bytecode is the holy grail.
And? Oh, and Mono has been pushed heavily as a way of creating cross platform apps. It’s not exactly the greatest thing in the world for doing so.
No it hasn’t. But if you want crossplatform you can have crossplatform. If developers want to leverage native platform bits for the platform then so be it. It’s called choice.
The point was that if Mono can’t be interchangeable with .Net easily, and it isn’t, then the advantages of having lots of Windows applications that can potentially be ported easily is fairly meaningless. My point was when that is pointed out people then lapse into ‘Oh, but we get a great development environment’. The only point in Mono at all is creating some excitement for Windows developers to move over.
No, no, no. It’s about the vast majority of windows development is going to be done in the .NET. And developers can do this thing called reuse. Maybe you have heard about it. And it’s not about binary bits running out of the box on different platforms. I’ve already explained that one.
t’s highly debatable whether that’s happening, otherwise it would have been just as easy for the open source community to create something new and separate from .Net that might take some of the good things from it, Java, Python and possibly Ruby. That would have been the sensible option.
Where is this vaporware option? Do you have it on your hard drive to unleash on the community? I’m sure everybody is waiting for your release.
Some people have to work in the real world and not some fantasy world where should’ve/could’ve actually exists.
You use KDE, push KDE, hate Ximian, hate Mono. So we know what your motivations are.
I haven’t mentioned KDE once here, I haven’t mentioned a hatred of Ximian and the legal pitfalls I have pointed out with Mono elsewhere are perfectly real. I notice you didn’t reply to them. I have also outlined why I’m hugely sceptical of things like the .Net language neutrality argument, the supposed advantages and the hype behind it – and I notice that Alan Cox outlined that better than I have several years ago:
http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnome-hackers/2002-February/msg00039…..
Do try and stick to the topic being discussed rather than lapsing back into the usual and predictable rubbishing.
Hehe, and suddenly your hundreds of anti-Gnome, anti-Mono, anti-Ximian, and anti-Novell posts on OSNews don’t exist anymore. It’s too bad for you that there’s this thing called memories.
You think you have a personal stake in the success of KDE and the failure of Gnome, and you feel threatened.
No, no, no. It’s about the vast majority of windows development is going to be done in the .NET.
And what’s that got do do with non-Windows platforms? And even if it did have some relevance, the only way it would be useful is if .Net and Mono can be interchangeable. They’re not ;-).
Where is this vaporware option? Do you have it on your hard drive to unleash on the community? I’m sure everybody is waiting for your release.
My goodness. You are that stupid – or you’re just trying to draw attention away from what’s actually been said ;-). I said it would have been far better for the people behind Mono to take what was good about .Net, minus the hype, and look at what wa good about Java, Python and Ruby as well.
You think you have a personal stake in the success of KDE and the failure of Gnome, and you feel threatened.
ROTFL. I notice you didn’t reply to what was discussed in that paragraph you quoted ;-). Par for the course.
And what’s that got do do with non-Windows platforms? And even if it did have some relevance, the only way it would be useful is if .Net and Mono can be interchangeable. They’re not ;-).
You’re clueless. Mono implements the same bytecode as .NET. As stated time and time again, if you want portability you can have it.
Where is this vaporware option? Do you have it on your hard drive to unleash on the community? I’m sure everybody is waiting for your release.
My goodness. You are that stupid – or you’re just trying to draw attention away from what’s actually been said ;-). I said it would have been far better for the people behind Mono to take what was good about .Net, minus the hype, and look at what wa good about Java, Python and Ruby as well.
And you fail to say why. This whole OSS generic runtime has been brought up time and time again. There’s parrot which is still vaporware. Mono delivered and is .NET compatible to boot. You saying “it would be better if” is completely irrelevant. It would be better if you ate broccoli at every meal.
Put your money where your mouth is if you have a better idea. Until then, you just look like a fool.
You think you have a personal stake in the success of KDE and the failure of Gnome, and you feel threatened.
ROTFL. I notice you didn’t reply to what was discussed in that paragraph you quoted ;-). Par for the course.
And I noticed you didn’t try to refute your hundreds of anti-Gnome, anti-Mono, anti-Novell, and anti-Ximian posts that you’ve made. You might have a bad memory, but others don’t. So next time remember that people already know your bias and it will come up again. You can’t run away from it.
> But as Mono does get more popular on the desktop, we can expect that other platforms will get more attention. After all, at least they’re all Unix for the most part.
Right, as I’ve covered in my article already. Theres no doubt there will be support, the question is “when”. Mono won’t do it, a third party will have to create the support.
Right, as I’ve covered in my article already. Theres no doubt there will be support, the question is “when”. Mono won’t do it, a third party will have to create the support.
That’s simple. When enough people on these other platforms want the apps. Writing stuff in pure C doesn’t get you a free ride either.
Writing stuff in pure C doesn’t get you a free ride either.
Seeing how a C compiler is the second piece of software built for every new type of hardware on earth after an assembler and it’s based on open standards, I think it does.
Seeing how a C compiler is the second piece of software built for every new type of hardware on earth after an assembler and it’s based on open standards, I think it does.
Having a C compiler for a platformm doesn’t get you a free ride.
I’m probably leaning against the inclusion of mono dependency in GNOME just yet, but… seriously… you should be a little calmer and more polite on IRC and it might get you further.
Resources are limited as always and you could help by paying/donating to Novell, or hiring programmers to work on it or contributing yourself.
> Resources are limited as always and you could help by paying/donating to Novell, or hiring programmers to work on it or contributing yourself.
I completely agree, which is why I think the inclusion of mono is a bad idea, the gnome team should have gone with a language already developed and ready like Python(more portable, less buggy).
In order to get HTML-kit for Linux it seems I have to give them $55. It’s free for Windows. Seems odd – unless I’ve missed the point somewhere? Anyone know better?
Nice to see apps being ported to Linux (whatever language they use).
However, I still miss a good WYSIWYG editor for Linux, something like Dreamweaver (the Mozilla Composer based ones -Nvu, Kompozer- don’t work with php pages, for example).
Including Quanta ?
Try this one – http://www.aptana.tv
exist a posibility for get this??
I wanna the update overall because until now i can not get Evolution-exchange working with my exchange server 2003.
To many guides that don’t resolv the problem..
If not i’ll wait
Looks like Gnome is getting busier:-)
… Metacity is still going to be slower and more piggish than better and more configurable window managers. Metacity IMHO doesn’t need patches, it needs a rewrite.