Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Who's Leading The Development Of Mono

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Who's Leading The Development Of Mono

    Phoronix: Who's Leading The Development Of Mono

    Here's some new statistics considering the development of the controversial Mono open-source ECMA CLI, C# and .NET implementation...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTE3NzQ

  • #2
    Implementation status

    Some useful links about implementation status and future roadmaps and features supported and planned features.

    http://www.mono-project.com/Compatibility
    http://www.mono-project.com/Roadmap
    http://go-mono.com/status/
    http://www.mono-project.com/Plans

    Comment


    • #3
      Why does Phoronix have to put the word "controversial" in every Mono related article? Almost everything has its proponents and its opponents. Why do we never read "the controversial Linux", "the controversial Mac OS", "the controversial Fedora", "the controversial Ubuntu", "the controversial Phoronix", "the controversial Gnome", "the controversial KDE", "the controversial Unity", "the controversial nVidia", "the controversial C++"? Because it's stupid. So why do it in articles about Mono?
      Last edited by 0xCAFE; 09-06-2012, 09:04 AM.

      Comment


      • #4
        in b4 mono trolls

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by 0xCAFE View Post
          Why does Phoronix have to put the word "controversial" in every Mono related article? Almost everything has its proponents and its opponents. Why do we never read "the controversial Linux", "the controversial Mac OS", "the controversial Fedora", "the controversial Ubuntu", "the controversial Phoronix", "the controversial Gnome", "the controversial KDE", "the controversial Unity", "the controversial nVidia", "the controversial C++"? Because it's stupid. So why do it in articles about Mono?
          because Mono is fucking controversiolest ?)

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by 0xCAFE View Post
            Why does Phoronix have to put the word "controversial" in every Mono related article? Almost everything has its proponents and its opponents. Why do we never read "the controversial Linux", "the controversial Mac OS", "the controversial Fedora", "the controversial Ubuntu", "the controversial Phoronix", "the controversial Gnome", "the controversial KDE", "the controversial Unity", "the controversial nVidia", "the controversial C++"? Because it's stupid. So why do it in articles about Mono?
            all this controversial questioning sounds controversial...

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by uid313 View Post
              Some useful links about implementation status and future roadmaps and features supported and planned features.

              http://www.mono-project.com/Compatibility
              http://www.mono-project.com/Roadmap
              http://go-mono.com/status/
              http://www.mono-project.com/Plans
              According to the project site Moonlight is still active even though Miguel says it's abandoned.

              They're also not implementing WPF because Silverlight is better.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by 0xCAFE View Post
                Why does Phoronix have to put the word "controversial" in every Mono related article? Almost everything has its proponents and its opponents. Why do we never read "the controversial Linux", "the controversial Mac OS", "the controversial Fedora", "the controversial Ubuntu", "the controversial Phoronix", "the controversial Gnome", "the controversial KDE", "the controversial Unity", "the controversial nVidia", "the controversial C++"? Because it's stupid. So why do it in articles about Mono?
                You're wrong about one thing, and I criticized the same thing in another topic: http://phoronix.com/forums/showthrea...236#post284236
                I think that the "betrayal" feeling of a lot of Linux folks was when Novell did a partnership with Microsoft to create software that interroperates with Active Directory and so on for OpenSuse.
                In minds of many, as Miguel was always a fan of the advancements of .Net (and Mono), it appeared to many that Mono would be a Microsoft backed implementation.
                Also, there are sites like "Boycott Novell" whic got a lot of fuss and maybe a lot of fans in Phoronix lines.
                As for me, at least regarding .Net/Mono world, Microsoft was a nice citizen, and it wasn't about another areas (like ExtFAT with TomTom), when Apple didn't. They also had great projects like IronRuby/IronPython, which even may be "look, MS do want to lock us into .Net", some people always thought about old "embrace and extend" think that Microsoft was used to do it in 1990s.
                I think that in long term, Phoronix contributors should separate the idea that Mono is a Microsoft product, it isn't. It isn't anymore offensive than GCJ is an Oracle product. Yes, is true that some pieces are from Microsoft, but without them it will be the world the same. In fact as runtime, Mono is a C product (is written in C, for some years it was using GLib, but right now it removed this dependency), is a Java like product, is a GCC like product (by using a similar representation of optimizations as Gimple from GCC does), it is a primitive get effective Generational Garbage collector, is a LLVM product on Mono for Android and MonoTouch products. Attacking Mono as a technology, will likely disable a part of functionality, but it will likely be rewritten to give something equivalent.
                As for me, Mono brings a decent to work with virtual machine for Gtk/Gnome world which performs a bit slower than GCC, but well enough for most usages. People with little time that contribute in desktop Linux area, should not look for leaks, but for functionality and fill it correctly. In this way I think is invaluable for students that do learn C# in university, and they can contribute back easily into Gnome world. This makes me to think that the closest platform to develop as productive as Mono is, is probably: Python, and for critical parts to use either Cython or C/C++ modules, which some people did (like in Mercurial or in TortoiseHg), but I see no reason why not to write all in a platform like Mono.
                Also Mono packagers maybe should look to improve the startup time in some cases by using AOT compilation for most used modules. This would remove maybe for some the "meme" like: "look how slow Mono is, it takes 20 seconds to start Banshee with this big playlist on my netbook".

                Comment


                • #9
                  For fun I deployed one of my C# MVC3 web applications to Linux/Apache.

                  IT WORKED. IT WORKED WELL!

                  If mono can save me $$ in fees for running Win2k8 Server VMs for fairly small clients, I'll use it!

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    And who of these contributors are not paid by Xamarin? Personally, I find it more interesting to learn whether Mono is a community project or a corporate project whose source just ends up being released.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Lesson in dealing with MONO for ALL RPM-based linux distros;

                      "yum -y remove *mono*".

                      This single command is GUARANTEED to FULLY solve the mono problem.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by droidhacker View Post
                        Lesson in dealing with MONO for ALL RPM-based linux distros;

                        "yum -y remove *mono*".

                        This single command is GUARANTEED to FULLY solve the mono problem.
                        Get over yourself.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by droidhacker View Post
                          Lesson in dealing with MONO for ALL RPM-based linux distros;

                          "yum -y remove *mono*".

                          This single command is GUARANTEED to FULLY solve the mono problem.
                          Bravo!

                          Originally posted by bwat47 View Post
                          Get over yourself.
                          Get up from under Microsoft.

                          Originally posted by Tgui View Post
                          For fun I deployed one of my C# MVC3 web applications to Linux/Apache.

                          IT WORKED. IT WORKED WELL!

                          If mono can save me $$ in fees for running Win2k8 Server VMs for fairly small clients, I'll use it!
                          this reminds me of pirated windows... oh wait!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Awesomeness View Post
                            And who of these contributors are not paid by Xamarin? Personally, I find it more interesting to learn whether Mono is a community project or a corporate project whose source just ends up being released.
                            A lot of contributors are not paid by Xamarin. Of course that the key developers are taken by Xamarin. Is in the project advantage. As key Gtk+ and Gnome developers are paid by RedHat and Novell.
                            If you take Microsoft contributions, those were certainly not paid by Xamarin (like DLR, Entity Framework). Codice I know that was the main contributor for Windows.Forms (for a time). Google with Summer of Code projects added features to Mono too.
                            Also there are a lot of small contributions by "non-corporate" people. I remember that were patches to optimize some string operations in Mono Devel mailing list. I tried myself to contribute a patch, but was from the C Mini runtime, and I'm not paid at all by any evil corporation (to add support for Just Too Late compilation, something I wasn't able to finish, so I gave up) and if was made, was somewhat similar with "Auto-NGEN" (albeit more limited) a feature of .Net 4.5
                            And even all would be corporate paid, why would it matter?
                            Mono is opensource, free by license, can and is used into games or as core scripting engine (like in Sims 3) or by Banshee or by Tomboy. It is the engine of all those magnificient software that happen into Linux world.
                            To sum it up: like this contributor (that has the site: http://neteril.org/ ) that was later hired by Xamarin, there are a lot of 2-3 patches people. Of course they don't appear to be significant, as GCC doesn't appear to be significant either by free-thinkers of adding simple features. Big features in many many cases require corporate funding.
                            @Awesomeness: do you know big contributions in LibreOffice that are done by a guy as you, who is not paid by anyone? And does make big big features? Like an OpenGL backend to make everything to run on GPU? Or to remove the depenency to Java by rewriting all parts into Python? Or into Linux kernel? Is not to say that LibreOffice is not a community project, but free is in freedom, but not necesarily in price: all things that require time need to be paid in a form or another: either by users, either by company that uses it, or by reporting bugs, or making small fixes.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by crazycheese View Post
                              Bravo!
                              First of all: why the hate? Which is the "Mono problem"?
                              And based on the "solution", of removing it, people that use Mono, have problems that are unsolved? Maybe it occupy disk drive (if this is the complain) but so it does the Qt in Unity, when it could simply be Gnome 3, but even Gnome 3 occupy more space than Gnome 1, and even Gnome 1 occupy more space than X, and X occupy more space than mc.
                              Ah, but you use X because you want to run Firefox to write hate messages, and for this you use a Javascript virtual machine which even in best case is some times slower than Mono. Even with IonMonkey that it will appear at the start of the next year. You also need a fancy UI so you use composite desktop and if you will use KDE, you will likely have duplicate libraries in your system anyway (Qt for KDE or Unity, and GTK+ for Firefox and LibreOffice).
                              Get up from under Microsoft.
                              Why he's under Microsoft? Do you have any base of basing your assertions?
                              this reminds me of pirated windows... oh wait!
                              At the end Mono solves the moral dilemma that Stallman had with Unix when he made GNU: you need a free (as in freedom) software to solve your solution. As Unix was driven by evil corporations (as it was Sun, SGI, NeXT) and Microsoft could become the replacement because of lower costs (compared with the Unix platforms) that their software bring, in this very same way Mono is vital for a lot of software.
                              The guy simply don't want to pirate Windows, he wants Mono, Apache and Linux. You cannot have freedom if you have the sofware but you don't have the ENTIRE stack to replace your software.
                              And you crazycheese: are you using NVidia and x86 Intel lately, or AMD64? Why not talking about the freedom that is attacked by closed hardware? And you attack an open software!? Why not attacking .Net itself, and praise Mono as it give the freedom to do what you can with closed .Net? Wouldn't it make much more sense?

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X