Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 7th Jul 2009 08:51 UTC, submitted by PLan
Mono Project We've already seen some heavy discussion on Mono and C# here on OSNews the past few weeks, as it became clear the patent situation regarding the ECMA parts of Mono was anything but faith inspiring. This issue seems to be resolved now: Microsoft has made a legally binding promise not to sue anyone who uses or distributes implementations of said ECMA standards. Following this news, Mono will be split in two; the ECMA standard parts, and the rest.
Thread beginning with comment 372066
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Comment by kaiwai
by setec_astronomy on Tue 7th Jul 2009 11:09 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by kaiwai"
setec_astronomy
Member since:
2007-11-17

On the issue of the non-ECMA specified parts, I pretty much agree with you. Developers interested .Net as an exit strategy from Win32 are essentially in the same (legaly unclear) situation as before the community promise. And frankly, it would not be in Microsofts current interest to make it easier to move away from their operating system and plattforms. They may have mellowed on the idea of F/OSS developments, but only as long as it happens to target Win32, preferably exclusively.

That being said, a legally safe(r) ECMA C# implemenation is of benefit to FOSS projects like GNOME, which are in need of an alternative to the C/GLib-GObject/GTK+ combo as a first class development platform which (from the outside, judging from comments from the developer community) seems to be possible with C# / CLI / GTK#, if for no other reason than recruiting people who have no desire to get their hands dirty using C.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Comment by kaiwai
by kaiwai on Tue 7th Jul 2009 14:23 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by kaiwai"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

On the issue of the non-ECMA specified parts, I pretty much agree with you. Developers interested .Net as an exit strategy from Win32 are essentially in the same (legaly unclear) situation as before the community promise. And frankly, it would not be in Microsofts current interest to make it easier to move away from their operating system and plattforms. They may have mellowed on the idea of F/OSS developments, but only as long as it happens to target Win32, preferably exclusively.


What hacks me off is the fact that you don't see the sort of patent happy stupidity from the UNIX world if people dare to implement the SUS03 specification, we didn't see Sun sue third parties that implemented the Java framework (as long as they didn't call it Java), and we haven't seen Apple sue GNUStep developers for reimplementing OpenStep. Why is Microsoft the only company who seems to have this desire to be the ultimate prick of the software world?

That being said, a legally safe(r) ECMA C# implemenation is of benefit to FOSS projects like GNOME, which are in need of an alternative to the C/GLib-GObject/GTK+ combo as a first class development platform which (from the outside, judging from comments from the developer community) seems to be possible with C# / CLI / GTK#, if for no other reason than recruiting people who have no desire to get their hands dirty using C.


Ok, lets say they go down the route and develop a uniquely open source framework ontop that is oriented around GNOME - it doesn't answer the $64,000 question: who is going to implement these on Windows? GTK+ right now is a giant mess with little attention being paid by anyone - GTK# is dependent on GTK+, so if the GTK+ is horrid, then the GTK# is going to be horrid too.

It has to be re-implemented or otherwise you loose one of the key features of .NET, add to that the requirement to integrate these frameworks into a decent development environment like Visual Studio (ever used Mono Develop? it is a really bad joke) so that developers can drag, drop and assign code to GTK# widgets like they would with Winforms.

Like I said, I believe the ECMA promise that Microsoft has given to the community but the problem that I have, however, is the stuff that sits on top - there needs to be a compelling enough way of making the mono open source framework (that sits on top) compelling and transparent enough for Windows .NET developers to adopt as to expand the ecosystem to include Linux as a platform to aim for during development of applications.

Edited 2009-07-07 14:32 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: Comment by kaiwai
by jpobst on Tue 7th Jul 2009 14:35 in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by kaiwai"
jpobst Member since:
2006-09-26

What hacks me off is the fact that you don't see the sort of patent happy stupidity from the UNIX world if people dare to implement the SUS03 specification, we didn't see Sun sue third parties that implemented the Java framework (as long as they didn't call it Java), and we haven't seen Apple sue GNUStep developers for reimplementing OpenStep. Why is Microsoft the only company who seems to have this desire to be the ultimate prick of the software world?


We also haven't seen Microsoft suing Mono for reimplementing .NET. In fact, this is them going out of their way to make it explicit that they will not sue, something that I doubt Sun/Java (pre-GPL) or Apple/OpenStep ever did.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: Comment by kaiwai
by modmans2ndcoming on Tue 7th Jul 2009 14:41 in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by kaiwai"
modmans2ndcoming Member since:
2005-11-09

1) Neither Sun nor Apple ever promised not to sue for their patents. It is just the FOSS community's paranoia that is driving the distrust of MS.

2)MONO is not the WINE of .net. Who cares if GTK+ sucks on windows? the goal of MONO is to replace C with C# as the preimire dev technology on GNOME.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[5]: Comment by kaiwai
by setec_astronomy on Tue 7th Jul 2009 15:11 in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by kaiwai"
setec_astronomy Member since:
2007-11-17

Ok, lets say they go down the route and develop a uniquely open source framework ontop that is oriented around GNOME - it doesn't answer the $64,000 question: who is going to implement these on Windows? GTK+ right now is a giant mess with little attention being paid by anyone - GTK# is dependent on GTK+, so if the GTK+ is horrid, then the GTK# is going to be horrid too


As far as I can tell (and I might be completly wrong in this, because it has been some years since I did some GTKmm development and am pretty much out of the loop wrt developments in GTK land since then) the most probable answer to your question seems to be that they (=most of the GNOME devs, including pro-Mono segment) don't care that much about the cross-plattformness of their Apps, e.g. if it runs on *nix systems (up to but not necessarily including Mac OS X) then great, everything beyond that is a bonus and up to the individual developers or projects to handle (e.g. there seems to be no policy of targetting Win32 and OSX as fully supported "alternative" plattforms like for example in the case of KDE4).

There - quite obviously, given the number of times people tout the superiority of C# - is enough interest among F/OSS developers of having soley C# together with either GTK# or - as it would be my preference, if I ever had or wanted to use C# - via Qyoto / Kimono with Qt 4.x and KDE 4.x as an alternative to C or C++, respectively. I can't comment on the quality of the GTK# bindings or the available tools (incl. monodevelop), but if Qt/Jambi is something to go by, then Qyoto does not necessarily has to suck that bad.

To sum it up: If you want to use the C# together with a "pure" F/OSS higher level toolkit / stack, this community promise *might* improve the legal uncertainity considerably. If you think that Microsoft will help anybody writing cross-desktop applications so that their OS is no longer the sole or even preferred plattform for deploying the products: I would not hold my breath while waiting for that happening

Edited 2009-07-07 15:13 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2