Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 16th Jun 2009 17:11 UTC
Last week we talked about whether or not the Debian project would include Mono in its default GNOME installation. This incited some heavy debate on OSNews, but sadly, the Mono debate also lead to some very nasty blog posts in the Debian community. Time for damage control, Debian project leader Steve McIntyre must've thought.
Thread beginning with comment 368953
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[7]: Show me the license - reverse engineering
by abraxas on Wed 17th Jun 2009 15:43
in reply to "RE[6]: Show me the license - reverse engineering"
Member since:2005-07-07
Mono is a direct implementation of .NET outside Windows not a reverse engineering of the framework. It is not reverse engineered to create compatibility and it has no accompanying statement that Microsoft will not consider legal action when times get tougher.
This is one of the most common misconceptions about Mono. It is not a direct implementation of .NET. It is a direct implementation of C# and the CLR. Some .NET compatibility is included but Linux applications like Tomboy, Banshee, and F-Spot use Mono's own libraries, which are not a part of .NET in any way because Microsoft doesn't support GTK+ or a *nix platform with .NET.
RE[8]: Show me the license - cheers for the correction
by jabbotts on Wed 17th Jun 2009 17:38
in reply to "RE[7]: Show me the license - reverse engineering"
Member since:2007-09-06
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2007-09-06
WINE started as a reverse engineering project. If reverse engineering is the only way to get one product to work with another, it is legal to do so. If XY Company makes a DVD player and I want to make and sell a universal remote that can be used with it, I am allowed to reverse engineer the IR or radio signals so that my remote will control that DVD player. In the same way, WINE is reverse engineered win32 allowing win32 native software to interact with my non-Windows platform.
If you have a Windows system on your network, CIFS is pretty much a given. (If you know of a working ssh server for Windows and sshfs support; please share the url) If you want to share files and printers across your network with Windows machines then it's going to be CIFS or some very cumbersom Windows native programs. Thus, reverse engineering CIFS to create compatability with non-Windows platforms is again a legal practice. Also, in this case, the CIFS protocol specs have been released openly thanks to the Samba project team paying off Microsoft to gain specs and permission to release them.
Mono is a direct implementation of .NET outside Windows not a reverse engineering of the framework. It is not reverse engineered to create compatibility and it has no accompanying statement that Microsoft will not consider legal action when times get tougher.
Maybe you've heard about that little myth about Linux (the kernel) infringing on 400'ish Microsoft patents. You know, that story they keep advertising to scare customers back too them while continually refusing to actually discuss in detail so that infringements could be addressed? Discussion between patent owner and infringing party to strike a deal or remove infringements being the second step after giving notice and before litigation.