Portable.NET 0.5.12 has been released, and is available for download. This is mostly a bug fix release, heading up towards 0.6.0, but with substantial improvements throughout the system, particularly WinForms. The release date for DotGNU 0.1 has been fixed at end-September. For Portable.NET the goals are to get pnetC to basic usefulness, fix as many system.xml bugs as possible, and make the core button/textbox/scroll widgets work in WinForms. Screenshots available.
Portable.NET 0.5.12 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
Portable.NET has nothing to do with Mono or Ximian
HAH! I was 100% sure that the first comment will be about the choice of the icon!!
So, basically, dotGNU is too small of a project to have its own icon on OSNews (it has less than 4-5 stories per year), so it just shares the Mono icon when we report on it. If you have bothered to click the “Browse By Topic” link on our menu, and scroll down to find the Mono icon, you would have seen for months now that dotGNU is mentioned there too, to be used with the Mono icon. It is better using the Mono icon, than the Microsoft .NET one, don’t you think? 😉
BTW, albeit a fair question for this first time, any subsequent comments on it in the future will be marked as “off topic”.
does this clash with or compliment Mono?
/me hopes the later is the case
It is not a compliment. Go to the dotGnu site and check it out.
“Click on the tumbnails” are they for real ?
Well, I wouldn’t even use an extra icon for Mono, maybe a MS .NET Icon in black/white (or other colors) would be nice.
Certainly the Mono icon in a .GNU post is confusing.
MONO is owned by Novell now, because Ximian holds the copyright to the MONO code and you can only submit to the mono project if you put your code under their copyright. Novell can change the license to proprietary at any time, because it owns Ximian now. There is no agreement with the free software community as in the case of Qt for instance. So think twice before you code for Mono, because you just work for Novell for free.
Portable.Net is part of the Gnu Project and wil make it into gcc at some point in the future. Also it treats Qt and GTK equally. Neither of both is favored. Also pnet has the more open and more friendly community in my experience.
Don’t spread FUD. The Mono compiler is under the GPL, the runtime libraries are under the LGPL, and the class libaries are under X11. Even if Ximian *does* require you to give them your copyright (it might, the GNU project does it) they still can’t turn it proprietory. First, to even change the license they would have to make sure there was *no* GPL code in the compiler or runtime. Even if they manage to change the license, you could always fork the last free version and develop from there. The situation with Qt is different. Qt will always be free to free software developers, because it is GPL’ed. The FreeQt foundation ensures that Qt will still be usable for commercial developers (you can’t link to GPL’ed libs) if TrollTech goes under. Mono is completely different, because you can link to their runtime (which is *L*GPL) without requiring your own code to be GPL. Thus, commercial apps can be written on Mono even if there is no FreeQt-style guarantee.
.. and it works on Mac too.
I’ve been waiting for Mono on OSX for ages, one where I don’t have to ‘pollute’ my system with Fink.
I can assure you that Mono does not require a copyright assignment in order to contribute. I’ve contributed code to Mono for over a year, and I have yet to sign one, much less hear the issue be brought up in conversation (until now).
Besides, even if copyright were assigned, the code is currently open now, so you could always fork the code whenever an attempt to “privatize” the code occurred.
it always _feels_ like a shame when i see duplication of effort like this. but of course there are upsides. interesting stuff.
this dotGNU has a pretty low profile compared to Mono. i never heard of it before now.