Old mono rants

[AICollector]

Hmmm...perhaps I'm not phrasing myself quite so clearly;

1. I am attempting to make a serious statment. Please reframe from childish comments.

2. I have tested Xubuntu on those computers mentioned. They do not work with it. I would file a bug report, were it for the fact that I could acutally see the screen (display is blank)

[Dragonbite]

Quoting Boycott Novell is like quoting the National Enquirer. Except their Elvis Lives stories are better researched and have more citations

And more fun to read.

[directhex]

Hmmm...perhaps I'm not phrasing myself quite so clearly;

1. I am attempting to make a serious statment. Please reframe from childish comments.

2. I have tested Xubuntu on those computers mentioned. They do not work with it. I would file a bug report, were it for the fact that I could acutally see the screen (display is blank)

Your target system is over a decade old. 1998 or thereabouts. Whilst you might know people with them, that doesn't mean targeting them as primary consumers is the right move - because you'd essentially be gimping the distribution for everyone else to buy a computer in the last <11 years. Under Moore's law, a modern computer is about 2^7.3333 times more powerful (161 times for those at the back). Or at least has that many times more transistors.

As it happens, the quoted system requirements for Ubuntu ARE met by your target system (although not with the Live CD installer). Right at the bottom end. However, the simple reality is that making something more shiny needs more resources - and the last-millennium userbase is not the largest. RAM is the killer, and even from that era, 256 meg of RAM isn't much (I'm pretty sure I had 640 meg in 1999 or so). Then again, a lot of work goes on in Ubuntu to ensure a good experience on low-end Netbooks (whose Atom processors are roughly equivalent to a 600mhz P3, and start with a half gig of RAM). And as for suggesting that Canonical put in the work - as a company, they need to think about where they're going to make back some money from their investment in Ubuntu as a whole, and Netbooks is it

So, on to the next point. What's wrong with Xubuntu? For about a decade XFCE has been used as a "GNOME Lite", and correspondingly, the required specs are about half that of regular Ubuntu. So why oppose it as a suggestion for these (in your own words) bone-breaking systems? A bug? It's not a bug until it's in a bug tracker - as nobody knows about it to fix it.

[bodhi.zazen]

Moved to recurring discussions as the original question is asked and answered and now the discussion has turned to one of those recurring Mono discussions.

FYI : Ubuntu Technical Board Mono Position Statement (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1200818)

[k2t0f12d]

Why don't you just purge mono and move on with your life rather then waste your time trying to impose your opinion on everyone else?I'm sorry, which of the changes that I recommend were forced on you by nature of speaking my mind? Are you saying that only those who share your opinion are allowed to speak? Why is it a waste of time for me to speak, but not them?

Anyway, Microsoft claims Linux is illegal too and has yet to prove it. Maybe we should just shutdown until Linux is Microsoft Certified as well?Its true that Micro$oft says that the kernel violates their patents. The kernel is a critical necessity for a free software platform and Mono is not. Right now, anyway. Its a good idea to keep it that way until software patent reform were to remove those threats so we can choose our own battles.

[k2t0f12d]

If it's dangerous to use Mono because of the possibility of a submarine patent, or the possibility that Microsoft will object to using a language that they invented: Why do people still use Wine? That *reimplements* the Win32 API which has got to be more risky than anything Mono is doing. Microsoft don't even claim to be able to provide anyone with a fair license to implement w32.

Your logic is solid. I don't understand it either.MountainX answered your concerns.

Well, this has become a current news item due to the Debian decision regarding Mono. Therefore, it is not just a rehash of an old discussion.

I was not aware of the mono issues previously. After reading a bit, the issues seem totally different from Wine. I can't repeat all the details. But Microsoft's strategy is to get the open source community to write new applications on Microsoft's platforms. This is a way to undermine Linux.

With Wine, we bring Windows apps into the Linux world. But with Mono, we end up writing new apps that target a platform technology designed and invented by Microsoft. With Wine, the development effort goes into the tool itself. If Wine were to disappear (which I do not think is a risk), no Linux-targeted open source apps would be affected.

With Mono, new development effort goes into the tool as well as new applications. If Mono becomes unavailable under a free license, and if all the best new apps over several years have been targeted to Mono, users of Linux will suffer a big setback and they will have to invest a lot of time and effort (and money) to port all those apps so they will run without Mono. Since we can develop such new apps now without Mono, and they can probably be developed just as easily without Mono, why subject the community to the risk? Even worse, why embrace a technology MS created? Sure, the CLR seems cool. Sure, writing C# GUI code is really easy compared to C or C++. But once one has used these technologies long enough for the cool factor to wear off, it becomes more obvious that the problems these technologies are designed to solve can be solved more elegantly with less complex approaches (e.g., using the Unix philosophy).

Linux is built on the Unix philosophy. Mono seems to undermine that foundation of Linux.

Microsoft sees the .NET framework as the future of its operating system. Almost every Windows API is going to be moved to .NET. The .NET Framework is becoming the operating system. Microsoft would love to see Mono become entrenched in Linux. Mono could be a trojan horse in my mind.In addition to that, I observe that WINE is not included in the Ubuntu default installation with any standard w32 apps.

[AICollector]

Again, I think I'm not making myself clear.

I am not saying 'that is Ubuntu's target market' I am simply saying 'Hang on a minute, what about all those folks who dont have a modern computer? Are we gonna push them out of the most user friendly distro? Is that really fair, is that Ubuntu? I don't think it is, and should it come to such a matter, I don't think Ubuntu should really be named after a humanist philosophy if it's going to neglect those who need it most. (By this, I mean that many of the people around here can't afford a more up to date machine)

Why, I'd love to file a bug report on Xubuntu, with the one problem; I can't see whats causing it because I cannot SEE anything. Hence my problem, you see? ( I can't, of course).

[Odemia]

I am sick and tired of hearing about Mono.

Then why did you bring it up?

a total loon (personal opinion, of course)

Crazy people are everywhere.

My own concern is that Ubuntu and other distros may some day come up with a system critical application that could mean the demise of said distros should Microsoft pull a fast one. I would hope people have enough sense to try and avoid that

Well that is essentially the exact same argument the RMS made (http://http://www.fsf.org/news/dont-depend-on-mono (http://http//www.fsf.org/news/dont-depend-on-mono)) that started the whole debate (or at least set it on fire), only he implied that including it by default would encourage more apps to depend on it and unlike your argument it wasn't about just one killer app but the possibility that a whole ecosystem of apps would be encouraged to grow (encouraged by Mono being part of the default install) and then fall if MS ever made a move to take on free implementations of C#.

Sounds like your real objection is to some "loon" on the dev forums. So why did you come and bring it over here? Not that you aren't entitled to an opinion and we all need a place to vent some times. But hopefully you also see some irony in claiming that some guy ranting about mono (logic aside) is waisting time in the midst of this rant about mono.

PS Not looking to flame, I need to vent to sometimes.

[directhex]

I am not saying 'that is Ubuntu's target market' I am simply saying 'Hang on a minute, what about all those folks who dont have a modern computer? Are we gonna push them out of the most user friendly distro? Is that really fair, is that Ubuntu? I don't think it is, and should it come to such a matter, I don't think Ubuntu should really be named after a humanist philosophy if it's going to neglect those who need it most. (By this, I mean that many of the people around here can't afford a more up to date machine)

At some point there needs to be acceptance that system requirements rise with capabilities. And even as it gets shinier, Ubuntu is STILL exceedingly low in demands compared to the competition (Vista Home Basic demands a 1GHz CPU and half gig of ram, as well as 20 gig of space; OS X 10.5 demands an entire gig of ram, 5 gig of disk space, and 1.5 GHz CPU). There is simply a limit to what can be done on a low-end system - and yes, that means that all the user-friendly doodads take resources (again, especially RAM). Should Firefox be dumped for everyone because it's a notorious RAM hog which sucks on a late-90's PC, in exchange for super-lightweight Dillo?

Again, I'm not saying that there isn't a market to be served by a low-requirement distro (and indeed IS served by Xubuntu primarily, but also others like Fluxbuntu) - but the simple reality is that that market is a niche, not the mainstream - and that as a niche, it cannot hold everyone else to ransom. A laptop with 1.6GHz processor, gig of ram, and 120 gig disk is £150! Would you begrudge developers for considering that kind of machine as the lower end of where to aim for rather than something with a 440BX in it?

As for your bug - as little info as you can provide is already a start. "Ubuntu works but Xubuntu does not, here are my system specifications" would be something that developers could use to diagnose - or at least help isolate - a problem. But throwing your hands in the air isn't how to get things fixed. The "price" for Free Software is contribution - and even bug reports are valuable currency at making the whole thing better.

[saulgoode]

Bradley Kuhn of the Software Freedom Law Center has written a cautionary essay:

http://www.softwarefreedom.org/blog/2009/jun/29/language-patents/

[zekopeko]

@MountainX

Quoting from boycottnovell? Really?

[bodhi.zazen]

If you want to remove all non opensource, you should run :

http://www.gnewsense.org/

http://ututo.org/www/index.php

also see BLAG

http://www.blagblagblag.org/

Anybody know of any others to add to the list ?

FSF lists only two, so not sure what happend to blag on this issue :lolflag:

[directhex]

If you want to remove all non opensource, you should run :

http://www.gnewsense.org/

gNewSense installs Mono by default, as Mono is Free Software.

directhex@desire:/tmp$ dpkg -I gnewsense-desktop_1.102gnewsense21_i386.deb
new debian package, version 2.0.
size 25866 bytes: control archive= 1932 bytes.
3618 bytes, 16 lines control
155 bytes, 2 lines md5sums
Package: gnewsense-desktop
Source: gnewsense-meta
Version: 1.102gnewsense21
Architecture: i386
Maintainer: Matt Zimmerman <mdz@ubuntu.com>
Installed-Size: 52
Depends: acpi, acpi-support, acpid, alacarte, alsa-base, alsa-utils, anacron, apmd, avahi-daemon, bc, ca-certificates, consolekit, cupsys, cupsys-bsd, cupsys-client, cupsys-driver-gutenprint, dc, dcraw, desktop-file-utils, doc-base, eog, epiphany-browser, evince, fast-user-switch-applet, file-roller, foomatic-db, foomatic-db-engine, foomatic-filters, gcalctool, gconf-editor, gdebi, gdm, gedit, genisoimage, ghostscript-x, gimp-python, gnewsense-artwork, gnewsense-gdm-themes, gnome-about, gnome-app-install, gnome-applets, gnome-control-center, gnome-icon-theme, gnome-media, gnome-menus, gnome-netstatus-applet, gnome-nettool, gnome-panel, gnome-pilot-conduits, gnome-power-manager, gnome-session, gnome-spell, gnome-system-monitor, gnome-system-tools, gnome-terminal, gnome-themes, gnome-utils, gnome-volume-manager, gstreamer0.10-alsa, gstreamer0.10-plugins-base-apps, gstreamer0.10-pulseaudio, gtk2-engines, gtk2-engines-pixbuf, gucharmap, hal, hotkey-setup, language-selector, launchpad-integration, lftp, libgl1-mesa-glx, libglut3, libgnome2-perl, libgnomevfs2-bin, libgnomevfs2-extra, libpt-1.10.10-plugins-v4l, libpt-1.10.10-plugins-v4l2, libsasl2-modules, libxp6, metacity, nautilus, nautilus-cd-burner, nautilus-sendto, notification-daemon, openprinting-ppds, pnm2ppa, powermanagement-interface, pulseaudio, pulseaudio-esound-compat, readahead, rss-glx, screen, screensaver-default-images, scrollkeeper, seahorse, smbclient, software-properties-gtk, ssh-askpass-gnome, synaptic, system-config-printer-gnome, tangerine-icon-theme, tsclient, ttf-bitstream-vera, ttf-dejavu-core, ttf-freefont, ubuntu-sounds, unzip, update-manager, update-notifier, usplash, usplash-theme-gnewsense, x-ttcidfont-conf, xdg-user-dirs, xdg-user-dirs-gtk, xkb-data, xorg, xscreensaver-data, xscreensaver-gl, xterm, yelp, zenity, zip
Recommends: avahi-autoipd, bluez-cups, bluez-gnome, bluez-utils, bogofilter, brasero, brltty, brltty-x11, bug-buddy, cdparanoia, compiz, contact-lookup-applet, cups-pdf, deskbar-applet, displayconfig-gtk, diveintopython, dvd+rw-tools, ekiga, espeak, evolution, evolution-exchange, evolution-plugins, evolution-webcal, example-content, f-spot, foo2zjs, foomatic-db-hpijs, fortune-mod, gcc, gimp, gimp-gnomevfs, gnome-accessibility-themes, gnome-games, gnome-mag, gnome-orca, gnome-screensaver, gnome-user-guide, gvfs-fuse, hal-cups-utils, hplip, im-switch, landscape-client, laptop-detect, libdeskbar-tracker, libgl1-mesa-dri, libnss-mdns, libpam-gnome-keyring, linux-headers-generic, make, min12xxw, mousetweaks, nautilus-share, network-manager-gnome, onboard, openoffice.org-calc, openoffice.org-gnome, openoffice.org-impress, openoffice.org-writer, pidgin, pidgin-otr, powernowd, pulseaudio-module-gconf, pulseaudio-module-hal, pulseaudio-module-x11, pxljr, rhythmbox, scim, scim-bridge-agent, scim-bridge-client-gtk, scim-gtk2-immodule, sound-juicer, splix, tomboy, totem, totem-mozilla, tracker, tracker-search-tool, transmission-gtk, ttf-arabeyes, ttf-arphic-uming, ttf-indic-fonts-core, ttf-kochi-gothic, ttf-kochi-mincho, ttf-lao, ttf-malayalam-fonts, ttf-thai-tlwg, ttf-unfonts-core, vinagre, vino, wodim, wvdial, xcursor-themes, xdg-utils, xsane
Provides: ubuntu-desktop
Section: metapackages
Priority: optional
Description: The gNewSense desktop system
This package depends on all of the packages in the gNewSense desktop system
.
It is also used to help ensure proper upgrades, so it is recommended that
it not be removed.

UTUTO packages it, but lord knows if it's in by default (I don't know how to tell)

[mdsmedia]

At some point there needs to be acceptance that system requirements rise with capabilities. And even as it gets shinier, Ubuntu is STILL exceedingly low in demands compared to the competition (Vista Home Basic demands a 1GHz CPU and half gig of ram, as well as 20 gig of space; OS X 10.5 demands an entire gig of ram, 5 gig of disk space, and 1.5 GHz CPU). There is simply a limit to what can be done on a low-end system - and yes, that means that all the user-friendly doodads take resources (again, especially RAM). Should Firefox be dumped for everyone because it's a notorious RAM hog which sucks on a late-90's PC, in exchange for super-lightweight Dillo?

Again, I'm not saying that there isn't a market to be served by a low-requirement distro (and indeed IS served by Xubuntu primarily, but also others like Fluxbuntu) - but the simple reality is that that market is a niche, not the mainstream - and that as a niche, it cannot hold everyone else to ransom. A laptop with 1.6GHz processor, gig of ram, and 120 gig disk is £150! Would you begrudge developers for considering that kind of machine as the lower end of where to aim for rather than something with a 440BX in it?

As for your bug - as little info as you can provide is already a start. "Ubuntu works but Xubuntu does not, here are my system specifications" would be something that developers could use to diagnose - or at least help isolate - a problem. But throwing your hands in the air isn't how to get things fixed. The "price" for Free Software is contribution - and even bug reports are valuable currency at making the whole thing better.
This and your previous post, very nicely said.

I think there are better reasons than being able to run a system on a decade old computer for not including Mono-based apps.

[AICollector]

Yes, I do see the irony, but I acknowledge that whilst I have some patience, that is thinning. Going through comments on sites (Such pristine examples include 'Mono is teh evil!) has very sadly shown me there are conspiracy nuts who prefer their reailty over everyone elses. Part of me feels we're not THAT far away from threats to Mono devs, which I especially do not want.

@directhex; I shall look up Fluxbuntu later. Also, some data about the componets in said computers are unavaible, as the motherboard itself is unmarked (and no diagnostic tool can access that info either)


This thread was really more or less attempting to be the voice of reason whereas a good many people around the net are loosing theirs.

[Dragonbite]

Ubuntu's Mono Position

full version found here : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel-announce/2009-June/000584.html

The Ubuntu Technical Board has been asked for a position statement on the use of C#, specifically the Mono implementation, by applications in Ubuntu.

These applications, as well as the Mono stack, were proposed for inclusion like any other application and underwent the same review process that all new applications and platforms undergo before being accepted into the archive.

With specific regard to the default installed application set, applications have been reviewed and compared against each other on merit and features. These often take place during the Ubuntu Developer Summits, most recently over the default media player.

A common concern cited about Mono is the patent position, largely it seems due to the originator of the C# language and associated ECMA standards.

The Ubuntu Project takes patent issues seriously, and the Ubuntu Technical Board is the governance body that handles allegations of patent infringement. The Ubuntu Technical Board strives to engage with rights holder openly in terms of the code that we ship. If a rights holder claims a patent infringement applies to said code, the Technical Board will commit to a review of the claim.

The Ubuntu Technical Board has received no claims of infringement against the Mono stack, and is not aware of any such claims having been received by other similar projects.

It is common practice in the software industry to register patents as protection against litigation, rather than as an intent to litigate. Thus mere existence of a patent, without a claim of infringement, is not sufficient reason to warrant exclusion from the Ubuntu Project.

(While the Ubuntu project wishes to be responsive to patent infringement claims, we cannot commit to the assessment and review of claims made by anyone other than the registered rights holder.)


Given the above, the Ubuntu Technical Board sees no reason to exclude Mono or applications based upon it from the archive, or from the default installation set.

Since the Mono stack is already a dependency of the default installation set for many remixes of Ubuntu, including the Desktop Edition, there is no reason to consider a dependency on Mono as an issue when suggesting applications for the default set.

(Other remixes may obviously consider the CD Size implications if an application would introduce the Mono platform to the set.)

[satipera]

I tried to post this to recurring discussions but could not. This means Red Hat, Suse community and Debian are not including it by default. So why is Ubuntu?

[Jesus_Valdez]

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1200818

Sticky: Ubuntu Technical Board Mono Position Statement

That shoud ask your question

[satipera]

Thanks, but I read it hours ago, it seems to state that until M$ sues someone Canonical are happy as things are. This seems reckless to me. HMM you have made 8 posts one of which is this one complete with tags so the moderator will move or delete it, how helpful of you.

[Dragonbite]

Thanks, but I read it hours ago, it seems to state that until M$ sues someone Canonical are happy as things are. This seems reckless to me.

Sounds like they are focusing on usability rather than politics?

When there is a good enough/better application to fit the bill then they will likely use THAT instead.

[satipera]

It has nothing at all to do with politics. M$ has a well documented history of doing this sort of thing. Encouraging standards it wants to be adopted and then later enforcing IP laws. If Canonical has plans to substitute other programmes later then be honest with us and tell us.

[swoll1980]

Thanks, but I read it hours ago, it seems to state that until M$ sues someone Canonical are happy as things are. This seems reckless to me. HMM you have made 8 posts one of which is this one complete with tags so the moderator will move or delete it, how helpful of you.

Post in non support sections don't increase your post count. He's just sick of mono threads, so am I. Ubuntu is keeping mono because there's nothing wrong with it, and they are not afraid of Microsoft's threats. Will you suggest that every time Microsoft screams "I'll sue" companies should just do what they say, whether it's right, or not?

[andamaru]

If Microsoft wants us to use their language why don't they clear up this mess. It's a nice language, it's just controlled by idiots. I'm pretty sure Canonical is going to give into peer pressure. If the opensuse guys aren't including it by default, I think that's more than enough reason to stay away.

This is coming from a fan of the language, such as waste.

[satipera]

Why are so many people so desperate to bury discussion of this important subject in the Ubuntu forums? Neither Red hat, Suse community or Debian are including mono by default. So why are Canonical? This has nothing to do with some "political" motive, it is common sense. Waiting for Microsoft to sue someone is not my idea of a plan. Microsoft have a long history of encouraging a format they want used and then later moving in with IP lawyers.

[.Maleficus.]

I'm not going to make another Mono thread for my simple questions, so sorry for the threadjack. And sorry for the probably dumb questions.

Has Microsoft actually said they were going to sue somebody? Don't answer "no but they will, it's what they do" because I don't care about that. I actually want to know if they've said anything yet.

The controversy isn't the use of C#, it is the distribution of .NET libraries, correct? Because C# is an open standard and Mono can handle languages like VB.NET, which isn't.

Why would SuSE be removing Mono if Novell develops it?

I probably have more but they'll be in regards to the answers I get, so /threadjack.

[cariboo907]

I would help if you posted a link to backup your claim. So far it looks like you made it up yourself.

[sertse]

Please provides a source, an official statement from Debian declaring that. Was it recent news? Thanks

On topic: The mono topic has been around for years, and pretty every angle has been covered in the hundreds of topics since. (Hint: Tag search "Yet another mono thread" - goes back to 06, probably some earlier..). What I'm saying is that your argument has already been heard before, and Ubuntu in their official opinion has decided not to be a valid reason to be against mono. Or do you think your opinion is really novel, something actually new to offer?

[Dragonbite]

If Microsoft wants us to use their language why don't they clear up this mess. It's a nice language, it's just controlled by idiots. I'm pretty sure Canonical is going to give into peer pressure. If the opensuse guys aren't including it by default, I think that's more than enough reason to stay away.

This is coming from a fan of the language, such as waste.

OpenSUSE is more of a KDE-based distro, like Ubuntu and Fedora are Gnome-based, and there are not many Mono apps for KDE, Kerry (KDE + Beagle) being the only one I can think of.

BTW, it looks like F-spot and Banshee are installed by default, according to their screenshot (http://en.opensuse.org/Image:Desktop-gnome111.png) for Gnome.

EDIT: I am about to start testing Milestone 3 for KDE, but maybe I'll try Gnome first and see what's included

Remember, though.. openSUSE =/= Novell or SLED or SLES from anything more than a technical standpoint and some sponsorship.

[andamaru]

OpenSUSE is more of a KDE-based distro, like Ubuntu and Fedora are Gnome-based, and there are not many Mono apps for KDE, Kerry (KDE + Beagle) being the only one I can think of.

BTW, it looks like F-spot and Banshee are installed by default, according to their screenshot (http://en.opensuse.org/Image:Desktop-gnome111.png) for Gnome.

EDIT: I am about to start testing Milestone 3 for KDE, but maybe I'll try Gnome first and see what's included

Remember, though.. openSUSE =/= Novell or SLED or SLES from anything more than a technical standpoint and some sponsorship.

I know openSUSE isn't Novell, but their was wording in agreement specifically for openSuSE so I'm confused as to why they wouldn't include it.

[Dragonbite]

I know openSUSE isn't Novell, but their was wording in agreement specifically for openSuSE so I'm confused as to why they wouldn't include it.
As far as I can tell, though, they do, though maybe not for the KDE version. Where did you hear they aren't including it?

[Tibuda]

It's their option.

[saulgoode]

Please provides a source, an official statement from Debian declaring that. Was it recent news? Thanks

Alexander Reichle-Schmehl, a spokesperson for Debian, yesterday wrote on his weblog (http://blog.schmehl.info/Debian/tomboy-mono/2009/06/30#tomboy-mono) that Debian does not include Mono in its "default install". This is not news, but a clarification of the situation (which had been misreported on some news sites and this subsequently echoed by rms in his essay (http://www.fsf.org/news/dont-depend-on-mono)).

[GeneralZod]

and there are not many Mono apps for KDE, Kerry (KDE + Beagle) being the only one I can think of.


Kerry is C++, so I'm not sure that this really counts :)

[Dragonbite]

Kerry is C++, so I'm not sure that this really counts :)My mistake then.

EDIT:
According to Linux App Finder Kerry is a KDE frontend for the Beagle desktop search daemon.

A program for indexing and searching user's data. At the moment, it can index filesystems, chat logs, mail and data, RSS and other. .

From the Beagle websiteBeagle is written in C# using Mono. The indexing is handled by Lucene.Net, a C# port of the Lucene indexer. The search user interface is written using Gtk#.

[unoodles]

I have a question that perhaps someone can answer.

Has a patent ever stopped the FOSS community in the past?
I know that they do not ship by default, but there are mp3 and aac (and more?) codecs that violate patents, and I don't hear anyone complaining about them.
There is libdvdcss which is a blatant violation of the DMCA, and I never heard a single complaint.

Why are people complaining about mono, when there is plenty of existing software that *for sure* violates patents?

[GeneralZod]

My mistake then.

EDIT:
According to Linux App Finder

From the Beagle website

Yes: Kerry is a C++ KDE frontend that uses the libbeagle-dev C-bindings to interact with GNOME's Beagle.

[directhex]

I have a question that perhaps someone can answer.

Has a patent ever stopped the FOSS community in the past?
I know that they do not ship by default, but there are mp3 and aac (and more?) codecs that violate patents, and I don't hear anyone complaining about them.
There is libdvdcss which is a blatant violation of the DMCA, and I never heard a single complaint.

Why are people complaining about mono, when there is plenty of existing software that *for sure* violates patents?

Because Micro$haft.

[ericab]

dont worry everyone;

sudo apt-get remove --purge mono-common libmono0 libgdiplus && sudo rm -rf /usr/lib/mono

[directhex]

Why are so many people so desperate to bury discussion of this important subject in the Ubuntu forums? Neither Red hat, Suse community or Debian are including mono by default. So why are Canonical? This has nothing to do with some "political" motive, it is common sense. Waiting for Microsoft to sue someone is not my idea of a plan. Microsoft have a long history of encouraging a format they want used and then later moving in with IP lawyers.

Have you lobbied for removal of OpenOffice.org, for implementing Microsoft-created ECMA 376? Yes or no?

And the "No Mono in openSUSE" thing is made up - yet somehow already accepted as fact. In openSUSE's KDE desktop, no, it isn't included - why would it be, with no apps using it? The GNOME desktop continues to use the apps that their team feels are best, which include Mono-based apps (although I disagree on some, such as Monsoon)

[directhex]

dont worry everyone;

sudo apt-get remove --purge mono-common libmono0 libgdiplus && sudo rm -rf /usr/lib/mono

Bear in mind this recipe won't work on Karmic.

[blackxored]

I think jumping ship on mono all at once is a bad idea. It is better to let further development mono app replacements occur. Many people dont use linux due to "how hard it is to use", and making people use less developed/user friendly apps is worse than relying on mono. They best solution should be slowly replace mono apps, not strip mono out right now like fedora.
-my two cents

The alternatives are there. I already posted them. gThumbViewer and Gnote.
I would program it myself If I need to, but I hate M$ and SCO pattent issues.
It's like Tim Berneers Lee telling you that you can't create a website!

I'm not a truly purist of free software, since we need contrib software sometimes, but that's out of point.

My personal standview: remove it, the language is not enough, the tools aren't enough either, to take that risk. They *will* sue linux, the novell's deal isn't a casuality.
I have always feared M$ would introduce it's code into linux, and somehow and someway it's coming closer.

[doas777]

Ok.
More on the same topic.
Now that Stallman has spoken: http://www.fsf.org/news/dont-depend-on-mono, let me speak myself.
I'm not agree with risking any free linux distribution because of size. That's mostly why mono is included by default in ubuntu and was accepted in debian. There's no way we couldn't find alternatives to Tomboy, and FSpot ( eyes closed: gThumb, Gnote), so why giving even the possibility we all know about. Free software is about choice, and some choices are better, others are riskier, and then finally others are safer. People have even (extremely IMHO) left ubuntu because of the decision of mono, we can't afford that.

+1 for removing mono, tomboy and fspot.

personally I don't mind seeing people leave over stuff like this. I want linux to grow more intutitive, easier to use, and increase its market share.

the very people you mention jumping ship, are the people that would leave ubuntu as soon as my goals were realized anyway.

[monsterstack]

personally I don't mind seeing people leave over stuff like this. I want linux to grow more intutitive, easier to use, and increase its market share.

the very people you mention jumping ship, are the people that would leave ubuntu as soon as my goals were realized anyway.

So the goal of the FSF and others is to ensure that Linux remains less intuitive, difficult to use, and without a significant market share? I know some anti-Mono folk seem a little crazy, but the contention that they want everybody to be miserable is somewhat absurd.

[Dragonbite]

Why are people complaining about mono, when there is plenty of existing software that *for sure* violates patents?

Because some people see Microsoft as being EEEEEeeeeevvvvvvvvviiiiiiiiilll! :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :twisted: :evil: :evil:

[SushiR]

So the goal of the FSF and others is to ensure that Linux remains less intuitive, difficult to use, and without a significant market share? I know some anti-Mono folk seem a little crazy, but the contention that they want everybody to be miserable is somewhat absurd.

Well said - and I can only agree so far. The whole "Mono is evil, everything is evil, the sky will be crashing down on us" rant is getting boring by now.

[blackxored]

Alexander Reichle-Schmehl, a spokesperson for Debian, yesterday wrote on his weblog (http://blog.schmehl.info/Debian/tomboy-mono/2009/06/30#tomboy-mono) that Debian does not include Mono in its "default install". This is not news, but a clarification of the situation (which had been misreported on some news sites and this subsequently echoed by rms in his essay (http://www.fsf.org/news/dont-depend-on-mono)).

Actually, they will, to my sadness, assumming slashdot isn't wrong:
Source: http://tinyurl.com/n5e66s

[directhex]

Actually, they will, to my sadness, assumming slashdot isn't wrong:
Source: http://tinyurl.com/n5e66s

Slashdot is wrong, and your source is 2 weeks old. See http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=7546513&postcount=44 for the detailed explanation nobody cares about

[rookcifer]

I have a question that perhaps someone can answer.

Has a patent ever stopped the FOSS community in the past?
I know that they do not ship by default, but there are mp3 and aac (and more?) codecs that violate patents, and I don't hear anyone complaining about them.
There is libdvdcss which is a blatant violation of the DMCA, and I never heard a single complaint.

Why are people complaining about mono, when there is plenty of existing software that *for sure* violates patents?

Because mp3 is not included by default in the majority of distros. And as for libdvdcss (or libdvdread) it is a necessary evil because without it, one can't watch DVD's under Linux. Besides, most distros don't include libdvdcss by default either -- it's sort of a "use at your own risk" type of thing.

This is different from Mono because Mono is *not* necessary. It is only included for expediency and to attract C# developers to Linux. I have never been overly impressed with Mono apps as there are much better alternatives to Banshee, just as one example.

And, no, the analogies to Samba or C are not valid either for a variety of reasons.

[gnomeuser]

Why are so many people so desperate to bury discussion of this important subject in the Ubuntu forums?


BURY? have you seen how many anti-mono whining threads we have here?


Neither Red hat, Suse community or Debian are including mono by default. So why are Canonical? This has nothing to do with some "political" motive, it is common sense. Waiting for Microsoft to sue someone is not my idea of a plan. Microsoft have a long history of encouraging a format they want used and then later moving in with IP lawyers.

Red Hat has no real community, Fedora being their community project on which the RHEL product line is based does and Fedora ships Mono, not by default in the Desktop release for space reasons but if you use the DVD then you get Mono as dependencies for Tomboy and F-spot by default. OpenSUSE ships Mono by default for their GNOME release to get Banshee, F-spot, Beagle and other applications. I don't feel comfortable speaking of the Debian situation, there is ongoing debate and using their current state in debate seems dishonest.

Regardless, GNewSense, the FSF sponsored and endorsed distribution currently ships Mono. All the distros above ship Mono and all of them have strict requirements for content being Free Software. Mono is Free Software, it's even covered by the OIN.

Please get your facts straight.

[knopper67]

Gnote doesn't have all the features of Tomboy, the dev base and the momentum

It doesn't have all the bloat, either.

[cb951303]

It doesn't have all the bloat, either.

what bloat? if tomboy is bloated so is Gnote since it's a line by line clone.

[saulgoode]

Has a patent ever stopped the FOSS community in the past?
History is replete with examples. Broadcast2000 was an extremely promising video editor which was canceled under threat of patents. The TIFF, JPEG, and (especially) GIF image formats have all been problematic for the Free Software community. The photomosaic plugin for GIMP is no longer available because of patents, and support for many audio and video formats is encumbered by patent claims.

I know that they do not ship by default, but there are mp3 and aac (and more?) codecs that violate patents, and I don't hear anyone complaining about them.
It is not a certainty that those programs violate patents, but there is a risk that courts might so decide. There is not much cause for complaint if one is apprised of the risk and decides for himself whether it is acceptable.


There is libdvdcss which is a blatant violation of the DMCA, and I never heard a single complaint.
Actually, libdvdcss is not a blatant violation of the DMCA; in fact, usage of libdvdcss for legal purposes is not covered by the Act. The court case which resulted in everybody assuming that usage of libdvdcss violates the DMCA was decided because the defendents were found to be using it to engage in illegal acts.

Distribution of libdvdcss, however, may risk violating the DMCA, and thus many distros will not include it by default; again, letting the users assess for themselves the risk being accepted.

Why are people complaining about mono, when there is plenty of existing software that *for sure* violates patents?
No software "for sure" violates patents; it is a matter of level of risk inhered by using or distributing the software. The general policy of most distros is to, when there is sufficient question about patent risks, let users decide for themselves whether the risk is too great to justify installing the software.

People are complaining about Mono because it is included by default. Were it like the other software you mention and made available in the restricted repos, the complaints would for the most part cease.

[knopper67]

what bloat? if tomboy is bloated so is Gnote since it's a line by line clone.

Look at that! A whopping 40MB for a freaking note-taking application.

[knopper67]

Compared with Gnote..

5325KB - About five megabytes I do believe...

[LowSky]

this MONO stuff is getting STUPID... why dont we all stop posting about how proprietary software is killing the opensource world and help some noobs in the Absolute begginers section, the more happy Ubuntu users, the less we need to worry about Microsoft.

[psyke83]

Look at that! A whopping 40MB for a freaking note-taking application.

Fail. Those are shared Mono libraries; you're comparing apples to oranges.

[ronacc]

and whats wrong with gedit ? I'm taking NOTES not composing and illuminating sacred tomes .

[knopper67]

Fail. Those are shared Mono libraries; you're comparing apples to oranges.

Still, dependencies count. Especially when there's that many of them.

[ghindo]

Still, dependencies count. Especially when there's that many of them.If only Tomboy needed those dependencies, then I would see your point. However, Tomboy isn't the only application that relies on those dependencies, so your point is kind of moot.

[directhex]

There's also bugs like Debian bug 534969 to consider. How is Tomboy's record for data integrity, compared to Gnote? Do we care about users' data?

[RAOF]

Look at that! A whopping 40MB for a freaking note-taking application.

I can play this too - observe from a minimal install:

aptitude install gnote
Reading package lists...
Building dependency tree...
Reading state information...
Initializing package states...
Writing extended state information...
The following NEW packages will be installed:
adduser{a} consolekit{a} dbus{a} dbus-x11{a} defoma{a} devicekit-disks{a}
esound-common{a} file{a} fontconfig{a} fontconfig-config{a} gamin{a}
gconf2{a} gconf2-common{a} gnome-mime-data{a} gnote gvfs{a}
libart-2.0-2{a} libasound2{a} libaspell15{a} libatasmart0{a}
libatk1.0-0{a} libaudiofile0{a} libavahi-client3{a}
libavahi-common-data{a} libavahi-common3{a} libavahi-glib1{a}
libbonobo2-0{a} libbonobo2-common{a} libbonoboui2-0{a}
libbonoboui2-common{a} libboost-filesystem1.38.0{a}
libboost-regex1.38.0{a} libboost-system1.38.0{a} libcairo2{a}
libcairomm-1.0-1{a} libck-connector0{a} libcups2{a} libdatrie1{a}
libdbus-1-3{a} libdbus-glib-1-2{a} libdevmapper1.02.1{a}
libdirectfb-1.2-0{a} libeggdbus-1-0{a} libenchant1c2a{a} libesd-alsa0{a}
libexpat1{a} libfontconfig1{a} libfreetype6{a} libgail-common{a}
libgail18{a} libgamin0{a} libgconf2-4{a} libgconfmm-2.6-1c2{a} libgdu0{a}
libglade2-0{a} libglib2.0-0{a} libglibmm-2.4-1c2a{a} libgnome-keyring0{a}
libgnome2-0{a} libgnome2-common{a} libgnomecanvas2-0{a}
libgnomecanvas2-common{a} libgnomemm-2.6-1c2{a} libgnomeui-0{a}
libgnomeui-common{a} libgnomevfs2-0{a} libgnomevfs2-common{a}
libgtk2.0-0{a} libgtk2.0-common{a} libgtkmm-2.4-1c2a{a} libgtkspell0{a}
libgudev-1.0-0{a} libgvfscommon0{a} libhal-storage1{a} libhal1{a}
libhunspell-1.2-0{a} libice6{a} libicu40{a} libidl0{a} libjasper1{a}
libjpeg62{a} libmagic1{a} libnewt0.52{a} liborbit2{a}
libpanel-applet2-0{a} libpanelappletmm-2.6-1c2{a} libpango1.0-0{a}
libpango1.0-common{a} libpangomm-1.4-1{a} libparted1.8-12{a} libpcre3{a}
libpixman-1-0{a} libpng12-0{a} libpolkit-backend-1-0{a}
libpolkit-gobject-1-0{a} libpolkit2{a} libpopt0{a} libpython2.6{a}
libsgutils2{a} libsm6{a} libsqlite3-0{a} libsysfs2{a} libthai-data{a}
libthai0{a} libtiff4{a} libts-0.0-0{a} libudev0{a} libx11-6{a}
libx11-data{a} libxau6{a} libxcb-render-util0{a} libxcb-render0{a}
libxcb1{a} libxcomposite1{a} libxcursor1{a} libxdamage1{a} libxdmcp6{a}
libxext6{a} libxfixes3{a} libxft2{a} libxi6{a} libxinerama1{a}
libxml++2.6-2{a} libxml2{a} libxrandr2{a} libxrender1{a} libxslt1.1{a}
mime-support{a} psmisc{a} python{a} python2.6{a} shared-mime-info{a}
tsconf{a} ttf-dejavu{a} ttf-dejavu-core{a} ttf-dejavu-extra{a} ucf{a}
whiptail{a} x11-common{a}
0 packages upgraded, 139 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
Need to get 20.4MB/38.3MB of archives. After unpacking 162MB will be used.
Do you want to continue? [Y/n/?] n
Abort.
aptitude install tomboy
Reading package lists...
Building dependency tree...
Reading state information...
Reading extended state information...
Initializing package states...
The following NEW packages will be installed:
adduser{a} cli-common{a} consolekit{a} dbus{a} dbus-x11{a} defoma{a}
devicekit-disks{a} esound-common{a} file{a} fontconfig{a}
fontconfig-config{a} gamin{a} gconf2{a} gconf2-common{a}
gnome-mime-data{a} gvfs{a} libart-2.0-2{a} libart2.0-cil{a} libasound2{a}
libaspell15{a} libatasmart0{a} libatk1.0-0{a} libaudiofile0{a}
libavahi-client3{a} libavahi-common-data{a} libavahi-common3{a}
libavahi-glib1{a} libbonobo2-0{a} libbonobo2-common{a} libbonoboui2-0{a}
libbonoboui2-common{a} libcairo2{a} libck-connector0{a} libcups2{a}
libdatrie1{a} libdbus-1-3{a} libdbus-glib-1-2{a} libdevmapper1.02.1{a}
libdirectfb-1.2-0{a} libeggdbus-1-0{a} libenchant1c2a{a} libesd-alsa0{a}
libexpat1{a} libfontconfig1{a} libfreetype6{a} libgail-common{a}
libgail18{a} libgamin0{a} libgconf2-4{a} libgconf2.0-cil{a} libgdu0{a}
libglade2-0{a} libglade2.0-cil{a} libglib2.0-0{a} libglib2.0-cil{a}
libgmime-2.0-2a{a} libgmime2.2a-cil{a} libgnome-keyring0{a}
libgnome-vfs2.0-cil{a} libgnome2-0{a} libgnome2-common{a}
libgnome2.24-cil{a} libgnomecanvas2-0{a} libgnomecanvas2-common{a}
libgnomepanel2.24-cil{a} libgnomeui-0{a} libgnomeui-common{a}
libgnomevfs2-0{a} libgnomevfs2-common{a} libgtk2.0-0{a} libgtk2.0-cil{a}
libgtk2.0-common{a} libgtkspell0{a} libgudev-1.0-0{a} libgvfscommon0{a}
libhal-storage1{a} libhal1{a} libhunspell-1.2-0{a} libice6{a} libidl0{a}
libjasper1{a} libjpeg62{a} libmagic1{a} libmono-addins-gui0.2-cil{a}
libmono-addins0.2-cil{a} libmono-cairo2.0-cil{a} libmono-corlib2.0-cil{a}
libmono-posix2.0-cil{a} libmono-security2.0-cil{a}
libmono-sharpzip2.84-cil{a} libmono-system2.0-cil{a} libmono0{a}
libndesk-dbus-glib1.0-cil{a} libndesk-dbus1.0-cil{a} libnewt0.52{a}
liborbit2{a} libpanel-applet2-0{a} libpango1.0-0{a} libpango1.0-common{a}
libparted1.8-12{a} libpcre3{a} libpixman-1-0{a} libpng12-0{a}
libpolkit-backend-1-0{a} libpolkit-gobject-1-0{a} libpolkit2{a}
libpopt0{a} libpython2.6{a} libsgutils2{a} libsm6{a} libsqlite3-0{a}
libsysfs2{a} libthai-data{a} libthai0{a} libtiff4{a} libts-0.0-0{a}
libudev0{a} libx11-6{a} libx11-data{a} libxau6{a} libxcb-render-util0{a}
libxcb-render0{a} libxcb1{a} libxcomposite1{a} libxcursor1{a}
libxdamage1{a} libxdmcp6{a} libxext6{a} libxfixes3{a} libxft2{a}
libxi6{a} libxinerama1{a} libxml2{a} libxrandr2{a} libxrender1{a}
mime-support{a} mono-2.0-gac{a} mono-gac{a} mono-runtime{a} psmisc{a}
python{a} python2.6{a} shared-mime-info{a} tomboy tsconf{a} ttf-dejavu{a}
ttf-dejavu-core{a} ttf-dejavu-extra{a} ucf{a} whiptail{a} x11-common{a}
0 packages upgraded, 151 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
Need to get 20.8MB/38.9MB of archives. After unpacking 168MB will be used.
Do you want to continue? [Y/n/?]


Tomboy: 38.9MB. Gnote: 38.3MB.

Of course, this comparison is stupid; we're not installing Tomboy on a raw debootstrap system, nor are we installing Gnote on a raw debootstrap system. But, as you see, the full dependency chains are about the same size. However, since almost all of both dependency chains are are pulled in already by other apps in ubuntu-desktop, the "moar dependencies" argument is a bit irrelevant anyway.

[doas777]

So the goal of the FSF and others is to ensure that Linux remains less intuitive, difficult to use, and without a significant market share? I know some anti-Mono folk seem a little crazy, but the contention that they want everybody to be miserable is somewhat absurd.

look at the "minimal/streamlined" vs "everything just works" arguments. you have some people proclaiming ubuntu the king of OSes because everything on their laptops just worked on defaults, and then you have folks complaining and threatening to leave because "ubuntu is bloated".

I do believe that there are many hobbiest and tech pros that care not a whit for marketshare, and will prolly ultimatly leave linux for something more 1337 (traditionally BSD), whenever linux gets "too mainstream" by their estimation. you should hear this SA I know....

[Jestersage]

For a while, I was debating between openSuSE and Ubuntu, because while I think ubuntu is better as a server (kernel, performance, and features), openSuSE have Mono. Even though Ubuntu right now have mono, it's outdated.

Until I see that in 9.10 it will be 2.4, which is the most up to date Mono.

Though granted, openSuSE still have Yast, but as of now Ubuntu actually become a worth while server platform by allowing C# to run.

So thanks, Canonical, for not listening to the FOSS-fanboys and understand what is needed is far more important.

[jonian_g]

look at the "minimal/streamlined" vs "everything just works" arguments. you have some people proclaiming ubuntu the king of OSes because everything on their laptops just worked on defaults, and then you have folks complaining and threatening to leave because "ubuntu is bloated".

I do believe that there are many hobbiest and tech pros that care not a whit for marketshare, and will prolly ultimatly leave linux for something more 1337 (traditionally BSD), whenever linux gets "too mainstream" by their estimation. you should hear this SA I know....

So, using mono will make linux more popular? I just don't understand that argument.

[directhex]

So, using mono will make linux more popular? I just don't understand that argument.

Making more awesome apps will make Linux more popular - the language said apps are written with is a distraction

[jonian_g]

Making more awesome apps will make Linux more popular - the language said apps are written with is a distraction

So without mono, can't anyone make awesome apps?

[directhex]

So without mono, can't anyone make awesome apps?

Sure. They *can*. The issue is whether they *will*. In the end, it's down to developers who actually write apps to decide on how they want to write them - and it's 100% their choice. If the people actively making awesome apps are using Mono, then that's why distributions end up including Mono

[paul_be]

wow... switch to fedora if you dont like mono. Good luck

[satipera]

If you look around the net in the next few days I think you will find that what I said about mono not being included in Debian by default in my original thread starting post was absolutely accurate, I am seeing more sites saying the same thing.

[directhex]

If you look around the net in the next few days I think you will find that what I said about mono not being included in Debian by default in my original thread starting post was absolutely accurate, I am seeing more sites saying the same thing.

http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=7546513&postcount=44

[jonian_g]

Sure. They *can*. The issue is whether they *will*. In the end, it's down to developers who actually write apps to decide on how they want to write them - and it's 100% their choice. If the people actively making awesome apps are using Mono, then that's why distributions end up including Mono

Well, this is just speculation. Mono has the same chance to be used by a developer as any other language available.

The only mono app that doesn't have a better alternative is F-spot. As for the rest it is a matter of personal taste (for me Listen is the best music organizer).

Till now, few developers have chosen mono. That is why we have so little mono apps and mono has been around for 5 years.

[Tibuda]

FOSS fanboys can use Mono. It is open source and is released under free licenses (http://www.mono-project.com/FAQ:_Licensing).

[wayne_cat]

mono vs. no mono ... squeeze vs. roll-up of the toothpaste tube.

I love these religious debates .... please go on! :popcorn:

[paul_be]

recurring discussions??????

[satipera]

I was a bit early for Boycott Novel but nice try. Even if I had not been, their sources should be taken for their individual worth and not easily dismissed as you would like.

[directhex]

recurring discussions??????

Why? First I've heard about this "Mono" thing

[directhex]

I love these religious debates .... please go on! :popcorn:

Emacs!

[directhex]

I was a bit early for Boycott Novel but nice try. Even if I had not been, their sources should be taken for their individual worth and not easily dismissed as you would like.

Their sources are in 99% of cases themselves. Most links are self referential. And none of their readership actually reads the sources, according to my evidence.

[paul_be]

Why? First I've heard about this "Mono" thing

lol i know huh:)

[linuxmagick]

Why? First I've heard about this "Mono" thing

Thanks for that. I really needed a good laugh :)

[satipera]

And what is your evidence? Is there some evidence you wish to share with us about BN'S readership?

[cariboo907]

This thread has nothing to do with Testimonials and experiences. It should have been posted in the Cafe to start with, now it is going in Recurring Discussions.

[directhex]

And what is your evidence? Is there some evidence you wish to share with us about BN'S readership?

Sure.

BN claims to have millions of readers - see http://boycottnovell.com/2009/01/28/new-bn-readers/ as an example.

I made a little experiment & wrote something I knew would get linked/attacked on BN - see http://www2.apebox.org/wordpress/rants/84/ for the statistics regarding that post (short version: 4.8K visitors, 17 from BN)

In June, my post saw over 40,000 unique visitors (excluding people reading on LinuxToday, or via Monologue, Planet Debian, Planet Ubuntu, or Planet Banshee), which is about ten times the people who visited the post I analyze above. How many of those fourty thousand, which is obviously a tiny fraction of BN's traffic, came from people clicking links on BN? The article was linked three times - twice in articles, and once in the IRC logs. How many?

22.

So either their readership is a lie, or their readers don't check their sources. That's the observation, backed by measurements.

[doas777]

So, using mono will make linux more popular? I just don't understand that argument.

I'm saying that when you strive for "everything just works", you usually end up adding additional components that not everyone will use. look at codecs. most users want them, but a few worry about the taint. if they wern't available (and easily installable), we'd have a lot of people not being able to do what they want to with their PC. it does not "just work"

mono will not make linux more popular in and of itself, but it will allow non-technical users to run mono app out of box. the more things work OOB, the better probability that new users will see value in it, and will thus count themselves amoung our ranks. the more the community grows, the more people learn that ubuntu is a viable alternative, and the community grows some more. one of the major goals of ubuntu is to be an os for people (everyone) not an os for the comparitively few technical users and FOSS purists.

having mono preinstalled is the same as an OEM installing sun java and/or .net on a windows pc prior to sale. it saves the user from having to know that they need to do it, and thus makes apps for that framework "just work".

[doas777]

So without mono, can't anyone make awesome apps?

it's not nice to choose a programmers langague for them. its their choice. if you wanna make awesome apps without mono, do it. I'll write some awesome apps in C#. I won't tell them to take away your compiler, if you give me the same level of curtsy with my interpreter.

[jonian_g]

it's not nice to choose a programmers langague for them. its their choice. if you wanna make awesome apps without mono, do it. I'll write some awesome apps in C#. I won't tell them to take away your compiler, if you give me the same level of curtsy with my interpreter.

You are the one who chooses a programmers langague for him. I never said that nobody should use mono. I just don't see any great benefit having mono preinstalled.
Who told you that I want to take away your interpreter?
If you are going to stop developing in mono if it is not preinstalled, it is your problem.

[zekopeko]

You are the one who chooses a programmers langague for him. I never said that nobody should use mono. I just don't see any great benefit having mono preinstalled.
Who told you that I want to take away your interpreter?
If you are going to stop developing in mono if it is not preinstalled, it is your problem.

The great benefit of mono are apps. F-spot doesn't have a competitor in Gnome. And there isn't a good music player for Gnome that could replace Rhythmbox except Banshee. RB should probably be replaced since it's development is slowing down and Banshee is shaping to be a better music player.
And do please find me something as good as Gnome-Do. There isn't. Gnome-Do is lightyears ahead of any competition, functionally and aesthetically.

There isn't any reason to settle for inferior app because a superior one is coded in a language that MS invented (by looking at Java).
If you don't like mono uninstall it or move to another distro.

Oh and do please explain this sentence.
You are the one who chooses a programmers langague for him.

[zekopeko]

*Name of a garbage text editor*

Vi FTW!!!!!!

[wayne_cat]

Vi FTW!!!!!!

OMG!!! ... Billy Joy used stolen code (from SCO UNIX) to cook up Vi ... ask Darl McBride ... he has evidences.

Seriously ... removing Tomboy from Ubuntu would be sexist:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomboy

And that's that!!!!!

[ronacc]

Seriously ... removing Tomboy from Ubuntu would be sexist:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomboy

And that's that!!!!!

fine by me I'm a dirty old man .

[monsterstack]

So thanks, Canonical, for not listening to the FOSS-fanboys and understand what is needed is far more important.

Keep trollin' trollin' trollin'.

Edit: or if not that, understand this: Linux is FOSS. Ubuntu is FOSS. Mono (regardless of the patent nonsense and the optional win32 codecs) is FOSS. The most vocal Mono supporters are keen to stress that Mono developers support FOSS and that they wish to create more FOSS applications for Linux. If Mono was just some lousy proprietary dev suite to create lousy proprietary applications no one would bother supporting it on Linux, and Ubuntu wouldn't even include Mono or even any Mono applications in the universe repos, let alone main. It isn't FOSS fanboyism. FOSS is the reason Linux, Ubuntu and Mono exist in the first place.

[wayne_cat]

fine by me I'm a dirty old man .

Google for "CharlesBukowskiBuntu"

I love it ... it's so dirty ... and it comes with the latest mono version. Unfortunately it has no kernel modules for ntfs ... and there are no samba binaries ... but you can mount BSD ufs2 partitions "rw" ... Linus wrote the kernel module ... it is in the "sandals and socks" repository.

[Bios Element]

Enough, Stop feeding the mono troll. Really, It's just stupid. The two of you arguing about mono gets nothing gets done.

Who cares about Mono? If you want to get started on Microsoft's "Patents", Then we better just ban Linux and be done with it as Microsoft claims to hold a few thousand patents on everything from the Menu to the Desktop.

And of course Microsoft is so confident in these patents that they're suing so many people right?...right? Of course not. The patents won't float and Microsoft knows this but helping spread their FUD on your own time is just pathetic.

If you like Microsoft so much you should go use Windows and support them that way rather then go on about Mono. It's tiring, it's stupid and really needs to stop.

[mdsmedia]

Keep trollin' trollin' trollin'.

Edit: or if not that, understand this: Linux is FOSS. Ubuntu is FOSS. Mono (regardless of the patent nonsense and the optional win32 codecs) is FOSS. The most vocal Mono supporters are keen to stress that Mono developers support FOSS and that they wish to create more FOSS applications for Linux. If Mono was just some lousy proprietary dev suite to create lousy proprietary applications no one would bother supporting it on Linux, and Ubuntu wouldn't even include Mono or even any Mono applications in the universe repos, let alone main. It isn't FOSS fanboyism. FOSS is the reason Linux, Ubuntu and Mono exist in the first place.
As one of the FOSS fanbois, thank you. Nicely put.

[directhex]

Keep trollin' trollin' trollin'.

Edit: or if not that, understand this: Linux is FOSS. Ubuntu is FOSS. Mono (regardless of the patent nonsense and the optional win32 codecs) is FOSS. The most vocal Mono supporters are keen to stress that Mono developers support FOSS and that they wish to create more FOSS applications for Linux. If Mono was just some lousy proprietary dev suite to create lousy proprietary applications no one would bother supporting it on Linux, and Ubuntu wouldn't even include Mono or even any Mono applications in the universe repos, let alone main. It isn't FOSS fanboyism. FOSS is the reason Linux, Ubuntu and Mono exist in the first place.

Nicely put.

[Viva]

The orginal post is not a mono argument. It was a genuine question about removing mono. I don't understand why supporters on either side feel the need to discuss mono in unrelated threads when there are hundreds of related ones about mono exist.

[monsterstack]

Solang (http://santanu-sinha.blogspot.com/2009/06/solang.html) [blogspot.com] is pipped to be some sort of magical F-Spot replacement by some people. Although in reality it's intended to be more of an F-spot-lite. It isn't a straight forward port like gNote, rather a brand new project in its own right. I tested the 0.1 release. It's still very raw (hardly anything works on it yet!), but it's provisionally in the Karmic repositories (http://www.mail-archive.com/karmic-changes@lists.ubuntu.com/msg02708.html) [mail-archive.com], so it might be ready for the masses so long as the developer keeps up the pace. Screenies:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_WrPRUR8Ep5g/SiPJW2CNIAI/AAAAAAAABzo/dnIrSu4Emfg/s320/search-using-tag.png.jpg (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_WrPRUR8Ep5g/SiPJW2CNIAI/AAAAAAAABzo/dnIrSu4Emfg/s1600-h/search-using-tag.png.jpg) http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_WrPRUR8Ep5g/SiPJDnuP7-I/AAAAAAAABzI/snLwgmw62tA/s320/enlarged-view.png.jpg (http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_WrPRUR8Ep5g/SiPJDnuP7-I/AAAAAAAABzI/snLwgmw62tA/s1600-h/enlarged-view.png.jpg)

[directhex]

The orginal post is not a mono argument. It was a genuine question about removing mono. I don't understand why supporters on either side feel the need to discuss mono in unrelated threads when there are hundreds of related ones about mono exist.

The original poster started it - 3 days ago, by posting a long ramble from ITWire's finest demagogue. The actual original question was answered 2 weeks ago.

[frustphil]

From what I learned about mono discussions: Mono could be one of killer tools in developing free/open source software, but it could also be the most lethal weapon MS could use against US.

Sorry, but I love the open source community. I don't want it to crash suddenly in the future.

[bekind2thenoob]

I have noticed how no one usualy brings up GNOME-Do in mono rants.

Maybe you just cant argue with the coolness?

[bakedbeans4life]

Mono is easy enough to remove from Linux distributions that make use of this questionable (in every sense of the word) piece of software, what I worry about is when it is not.

If Gnome became dependent upon Mono (never say never) how comfortable would you feel about using it? I get queezy just thinking about this possibility.

Mono always seemed like a solution without a problem. It should be included in the repos, but should not be installed by default.

[jonian_g]

I have noticed how no one usualy brings up GNOME-Do in mono rants.

Maybe you just cant argue with the coolness?

Maybe, because it is not preinstalled and will never be. Gnome3 will have a function called Activities that does the same thing and is cooler.

[directhex]

Mono always seemed like a solution without a problem. It should be included in the repos, but should not be installed by default.

Mono was a solution to a specific problem, but reality isn't welcome to this party

[zekopeko]

From what I learned about mono discussions: Mono could be one of killer tools in developing free/open source software, but it could also be the most lethal weapon MS could use against US.

Sorry, but I love the open source community. I don't want it to crash suddenly in the future.

then you obviously didn't pay attention. mono is exposed as much as a any FLOSS project.

[directhex]

then you obviously didn't pay attention. mono is exposed as much as a any FLOSS project.

No, remember, every other app is immune to patent risks.

[Vadi]

It's just magically getting more attention. For no reason whatsoever.

[zekopeko]

It's just magically getting more attention. For no reason whatsoever.

it's getting attention from the people who think that writing a companies name with a dollar sign ($) makes them uber cool rebels against the "evil system".

[change_mode]

I don't use any of the applications that depend on mono and I don't think these 3 applications justify the extra space mono needs, especially because they can easily be replaced with similar applications that don't depend on it... so if they ever run out of space for the CD image, mono is the first thing that should be removed.

[ronacc]

there are those of us who learn from history and those who don't .

[cb951303]

It's just magically getting more attention. For no reason whatsoever.

Yeah that makes sense. People love to use inferior products for no reason. MAGIC!

[cb951303]

there are those of us who learn from history and those who don't .

And what history would that be? Is Linux ever sued by MS for patent infringement?

[Hyporeal]

And of course Microsoft is so confident in these patents that they're suing so many people right?...right? Of course not. The patents won't float and Microsoft knows this....

That is the heart of the issue, isn't it? The arguments about morality, choice, bloat, and quality are all window dressing. The central point is whether Linux programs written in C# are going to suddenly become illegal. If so, I think we'd generally agree that we need to move away from those programs. If not, I think we'd generally agree that there's nothing wrong with using them.

This is a legal issue. I don't have the expertise necessary to judge one way or the other (and I sense that I most posters in this thread are in the same situation). Therefore I don't think that appealing to popular opinion is useful in this case. Leave it to the lawyers.

[ronacc]

not yet . but the history is one of broken promises and suits , why should we expose ourselves ?

[zekopeko]

not yet . but the history is one of broken promises and suits , why should we expose ourselves ?

We should also remove python. Somebody could sue it into oblivion. Better to be safe then sorry later! REMOVE PYTHON!!!! PROTECT YOUR PARANOIA INDUCED "FREEDOM"!!!!

[wayne_cat]

Python is a "cloned" Microsoft technology? ... OMG!!! ... I REMOVED IT ... NOW I'M FREE!!!!!!!

[doas777]

No, remember, every other app is immune to patent risks.

nothing is immune to patent risks. we need to destroy the system to be safe.

[zekopeko]

That is the heart of the issue, isn't it? The arguments about morality, choice, bloat, and quality are all window dressing. The central point is whether Linux programs written in C# are going to suddenly become illegal. If so, I think we'd generally agree that we need to move away from those programs. If not, I think we'd generally agree that there's nothing wrong with using them.

This is a legal issue. I don't have the expertise necessary to judge one way or the other (and I sense that I most posters in this thread are in the same situation). Therefore I don't think that appealing to popular opinion is useful in this case. Leave it to the lawyers.

The issue is that ANY software can be sued for patent infringement. So to be truly safe you shouldn't use any software that doesn't have patent protection attached to it. Including but ,not limited to, Linux kernel and associated apps.

[doas777]

not yet . but the history is one of broken promises and suits , why should we expose ourselves ?

no, the history is broken threats of suits. not any actual suits.

[bodhi.zazen]

The original poster started it - 3 days ago, by posting a long ramble from ITWire's finest demagogue. The actual original question was answered 2 weeks ago.

+1 (The OP started the off topic discussion).

What they never say is that mono is released under the GPL. It is nothing more then FUD and fear mongering.

If you don't like mono, remove it or use a distro which does not have mono, such as Fedora, and stop all this off topic ranting already.

The staff is discussing what to do, if anything, about the mono ranting.

[cb951303]

not yet . but the history is one of broken promises and suits , why should we expose ourselves ?

because we're exposed no matter what you do. and it's hypocritical to use hundreds of FOSS software that infringes other patents and not use Mono just because it became popular. What if MS sues us because of SAMBA. What will happen to thousands of corporations that rely on SAMBA for communication with Windows machines?

[bodhi.zazen]

Thread closed.

This is the old ranting thread, if you wish to discuss mono , use the new thread Monolith (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1202591)

[Vadi]

And what history would that be? Is Linux ever sued by MS for patent infringement?

Uh, yeah? Hello, FAT? Read the news dude. Halloween documents, etc.

Do you seriously think that one of the worlds most successful corporations will be publicly talking about their blackmailing and etc? Lol ):P

edit: oooh, the samba argument. Stop trying to drag others into your hole and stay on topic. Samba actually has legal processes behind them in EU.

[bapoumba]

Welcome to the recurring discussions

[cb951303]

Uh, yeah? Hello, FAT? Read the news dude. Halloween documents, etc.

Do you seriously think that one of the worlds most successful corporations will be publicly talking about their blackmailing and etc? Lol ):P

edit: oooh, the samba argument. Stop trying to drag others into your hole and stay on topic. Samba actually has legal processes behind them in EU.

you didn't like the SAMBA argument? just pick your software. Jo Shields has hundreds of patented FOSS software list on his blog. Research it.

BTW, you have to prove your argument. "has legal processes behind them in EU" means nothing. What is your source?

[Vadi]

Er. The news. Go look.