Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 12th Jun 2009 18:25 UTC
Debian and its clones Well, this is interesting. We already have a Mono item ruffling some feathers on OSNews today, but here we have the apparent news that Tomboy has become a default part of GNOME on Squeeze, the next release of Debian. Wait, what now? Update: I've updated the article with Fedora's position in all this. Read on! Update II: Josselin Mouette replies.
Thread beginning with comment 368591
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[6]: 50MB?
by vivainio on Mon 15th Jun 2009 13:19 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: 50MB?"
vivainio
Member since:
2008-12-26

Microsoft has claimed patent rights on several pieces of software in the FLOSS world including the kernel itself. This isn't limited to Mono.


Perhaps it's just easier to "call bullshit" on the other claims of Microsoft, when they refer to technology not developed by them.

The argument you made is that it would be easy to just port Mono apps. While it is possible it's not something that can be done overnight. Tomboy is relatively simple compared to apps like MonoDevelop and F-Spot.


MonoDevelop is of course a redundant app for non-mono world.

Here's an interesting relevant link:

http://www.figuiere.net/hub/blog/?2009/04/01/656-porting-to-cpluspl...

It mentions:

To help all of this, I have implemented a small library (in the same tree) called "sharp" aimed at helping port from Gtk#. In addition to boost, I also make an extensive use of Gtkmm and libxml++.


So, I figure the porting will only get easier in the future. We might not hear of "line-by-line" port success stories of gnote, but the porting effort in itself doesn't seem insurmountable.

In any case, even if we were dealing with a reimplementation instead of port, it's still easier because you can copy architecture (class structure) and algorithms directly.

What I'm saying is - it's not necessary to be terribly worried about Mono, as long as we have a good backup strategy.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[7]: 50MB?
by abraxas on Mon 15th Jun 2009 13:39 in reply to "RE[6]: 50MB?"
abraxas Member since:
2005-07-07

Perhaps it's just easier to "call bullshit" on the other claims of Microsoft, when they refer to technology not developed by them.


Perhaps it is in a discussion forum but not in a court of law. This is why I am re-iterating that this is a software patent issue in general not a Mono specific issue.

MonoDevelop is of course a redundant app for non-mono world.


I wouldn't agree. MonoDevelop is a very good IDE and supports many languages other than Mono.

So, I figure the porting will only get easier in the future. We might not hear of "line-by-line" port success stories of gnote, but the porting effort in itself doesn't seem insurmountable.


A big benefit to Mono over C++ is platform independence. Applications should be relatively simple to port to alternative architectures and operating systems as long as Mono itself is available for the platform. C++ is a built more complicated in that regard.

The original point I was trying to make is that just because a simple app like Tomboy was ported doesn't mean that it's going to be as easy to port more complicated programs.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[8]: 50MB?
by vivainio on Mon 15th Jun 2009 14:03 in reply to "RE[7]: 50MB?"
vivainio Member since:
2008-12-26

This is why I am re-iterating that this is a software patent issue in general not a Mono specific issue.


It's a waste of breath to talk about software patents, generally.


I wouldn't agree. MonoDevelop is a very good IDE and supports many languages other than Mono.


We have those already, so this is not a "critical" app in any sense.


A big benefit to Mono over C++ is platform independence. Applications should be relatively simple to port to alternative architectures and operating systems as long as Mono itself is available for the platform. C++ is a built more complicated in that regard.


This is why I'd advocate people use C++ & Qt instead, if they insist on a "static" language. C++ with Qt is really not harder than Java / C#, and probably as/more portable.

The original point I was trying to make is that just because a simple app like Tomboy was ported doesn't mean that it's going to be as easy to port more complicated programs.

Probably true. But it's doable in reasonable time. What's important is who is willing to put in the resources, and where. Currently, some developers want to develop in Mono, and that's all fine and dandy. If some app becomes "problematic", it can be ported to C++ or Python (probably C++ - you'll want some significant runtime performance/footprint benefits if you are doing the porting in the first place); if nobody is willing to put in the time, then the app isn't/wasn't that important in the first place.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[7]: 50MB?
by dhasenan on Tue 16th Jun 2009 15:42 in reply to "RE[6]: 50MB?"
dhasenan Member since:
2009-06-16

So, I figure the porting will only get easier in the future. We might not hear of "line-by-line" port success stories of gnote, but the porting effort in itself doesn't seem insurmountable.


Redesign will be necessary for anything that makes use of reflection.

Also, wouldn't it be easier to write a compiler backend for Mono that outputs simple, portable C code? This fixes the portability issue, but not the size issue (CIL is smaller than the equivalent machine code in many cases); but if you have a framework that you expect people to use, you may as well bite the bullet.

Reply Parent Score: 1