Novell has just released version 1.0-RC1 of Mono. Get the files here and begin testing!
Mono 1.0-RC1 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
http://www.mono-project.com/about/index.html
and
http://www.go-mono.com/hackers.html
?
one has 01 Jun 2004: Release of Mono 1.0 Beta 2 and the other wich i think is the one that matters most is Jun 15th, 2004: Mono Beta 3 has been released ?
What is this ? A split inhouse view of progress , or is just a delay in …. in what ?
One is maintained by Ximian, the other one is Novell’s work I think. I think go-mono.com is more up to date. The 1.0 release is expected in July anyway.
While mono 0.97 does, GTK# 0.99 doesn’t…
“Unhandled Exception: System.NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object in <0x0005d> GtkSharp.Generation.ClassBase:GenMethods (GtkSharp.Generation.GenerationInfo,System.Collections.Hashtable,GtkSh arp.Generation.ClassBase)”
Apparently, it does compile for the developers – do you think they’d have released it if not?
If you had specified some information about your setup, build environment etc., it would actually have been helpful…
– Simon
It wasn’t meant to help someone debugging it, just to warn readers that it might not compile on their setup. I’m just gonna wait a couple of days to see if this is a known issue, and if nothing comes up, I’ll submit a detailed bug report.
If you still want to know:
LFS 5.1.1, BLFS 5.1
Kernel 2.4.26
GCC 3.3.3
Gnome 2.6.1 (Glib 2.4.2, Pango 1.4.0, ATK 1.6.1, GTK+ 2.4.3)
and before new compilation of mono:
Mono 0.96, GTK# 0.98, Monodoc 0.17, Gtksourceview-sharp 0.3, Gecko# 0.5.
Looking back then we know that mostly Ximian and all the volunteer developers made MONO what it is today (mostly volunteers). This sounds political but adding the name Novell to it would give the reader the impression that this indeed is a Novell product where hundrets of well paid Novell engineers spent years developing on for commercial interests.
Even if Ximian was the copyright holder of MONO and now Novell/Ximian this product is still no product of Novell since Novell didn’t add much to it. It’s more a shift of Money and Copyright to a bigger gamer and nothing more.
People new to this site would think that this is something commercial from Novell and would ask where to buy this or would miscredit and honour this as Novell product and would ignore or not understand that this adds plenty of volunteer work as well.
The same way “Ximian Evolution” became just “Evolution” and not “Novell Evolution” because of the same reasons. The “Evolution” hackers know that adding a company brand to it would miscredit and not honour all the manpower of volunteer workers. Without those sending in patches, sending in feedback, sending in bugreports, testing, using, fixing, developing on it neither MONO nor Evolution would have become what they are today.
One is maintained by Ximian, the other one is Novell’s work I think. I think go-mono.com is more up to date. The 1.0 release is expected in July anyway.
Oh, that makes a whole lot of sense.
This sounds political but adding the name Novell to it would give the reader the impression that this indeed is a Novell product where hundrets of well paid Novell engineers spent years developing on for commercial interests.
Mono is an open source community effort that is sponsored by Novell – or so says the go-mono web site. These artcles are indeed misleading, but then again, I think that’s the point
.
The same way “Ximian Evolution” became just “Evolution” and not “Novell Evolution” because of the same reasons. The “Evolution” hackers know that adding a company brand to it would miscredit and not honour all the manpower of volunteer workers.
Well it actually is called ‘Novell Evolution’ now apparently, and in all the articles on OSNews and elsewhere I’ve heard it referred to as ‘Novell Evolution’. This use of Novell Evolution seems to have become more prominent in the past few months:
http://www.novell.com/products/evolution/
However, I think this is really to do with a lot of internal politics within Novell rather than anything else.
No, It’s called ‘Evolution’.
NO Ximian
NO Novell
This information was given to me by ‘notzed’ one of their lead developers working on Evolution.
http://www.go-mono.com is the current site and has historically been focused on creating Mono: how do we go from zero to 1.0: and it was designed to hold design documents, notes and plans.
Mono-project.com is a new web site that is not aimed at the developers that made Mono happen, but towards users of Mono (and we will be migrating the content from go-mono.com to the “Contributing” section of Mono).
I asked for three colors in the new web site to clearly distinguish those sections: informational, end-user and Mono hackers.
What I wonder is… When will monodevelop get IDE builder? aka. Delphi.
Any projected progress dates??
Click the line number gutter in monodevelop and poof away it goes.
Use Glade.
You obviosly don’t know what you talk about.
Let me explain. There’s a VERY BIG difference between Glade and Delphi. Glade may be usable for some things. But that’s not even near to real RAD tool.
Sharpdevelop and M$Visual… both have real RAD GUI designers. Not some semi interfaced mockup like Glade.
And since monodevelop is port of sharpdevelop, my question is very valid.
I never said your question was invalid, I gave my opinion. Its blatantly obvious as to what the differences between Delphi/VSNET and MonoDevelop GUIs are. Curb your personal insults and/or grow up.
Do you define ‘real RAD GUI’ as a bunch of non-visual controls that can be dropped on a form to do everything except brush your teeth? I suspect people may have to buckle down and write some code before this becomes a reality.
If you took the time to visit the MonoDevelop homepage you would find http://www.newsforge.com/programming/04/06/12/1649241.shtml
Would just like to extend my thanks to all the developers.
I wasn’t insulted (Where did you get this feeling?). It’s just that I hate to think about Glade as being some sophisticated tool. And people are promoting it as THE thing.
Do you define ‘real RAD GUI’ as a bunch of non-visual controls that can be dropped on a form to do everything except brush your teeth?
It’s not dropping the controls what makes real RAD tool, but connection between GUI and source while you work. OK, controls have some charm, but assigning properties and functions to objects on fly is completely different from what Glade does.
I suspect people may have to buckle down and write some code before this becomes a reality.
Yep, that’s why I was asking how long for this reality to become reality
A Gtk# GUI designer is in the works, and hopefully some ASP.Net hooks and tie-ins
Well, no answer about predicted timeframe here. You can read same on monodevelop page.
A new gui builder is supposedly in the works. I believe its a replacement for Glade all together and not just specific to MonoDevelop. Someone correct me if I’m wrong. MonoDevelop is very buggy at this point, but if you like you could download a trial version of Slickedit to play around with. It has code completion and such.
I get the feeling that many Lunix developers are not aware of the advantages of a good GUI builder. In Delphi, there is a very tight integration between the IDE and your source code (optional of course!), to the extent, that many visual controls are live during development, DB controls are a good example of this. Another place where a decent IDe helps is rvent handling can be so much easier to deal with. Before someone points out that GUI builders are bed because of all the code they generate, a really good GUI will generate hardly any code to avoid all the clutter one gets in for example VS IDE or most of the Java IDEs (except Ideal).
Ever heard of eclipse?
“Ever heard of eclipse?”
Unfortunately… yes!
Having the gui develop to be part of mono, as seen in the screen shots from the sharpdevelop website, would be very desirable.