Page 5 of 17 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 162

Thread: MonoDevelop vs. Xamarin Studio IDEs

  1. #41
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Basement
    Posts
    389

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by directhex View Post
    So your pissing and moaning about things in which you aren't even invested achieves what, precisely?
    Mono had the assignment policy before this. So this was obvious an untriggered bomb. No sane person sits on a bomb. mySQL, OpenOfficeorg, Qt already exploded into unpleasness. Why should anyone eat the Mono bait?

    Dont you get it? Unfair license policies is just the step before you get raped. Just say no.

  2. #42
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    347

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by funkSTAR View Post
    Mono had the assignment policy before this.

    So this was obvious an untriggered bomb. No sane person sits on a bomb. mySQL, OpenOfficeorg, Qt already exploded into unpleasness. Why should anyone eat the Mono bait?

    Dont you get it? Unfair license policies is just the step before you get raped. Just say no.
    You don't seem to understand why people contribute towards, or use, Free Software.

    This is a reasonably common position, and depressingly common amongst the noisiest of armchair generals.

  3. #43
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Basement
    Posts
    389

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by directhex View Post
    This is a reasonably common position, and depressingly common amongst the noisiest of armchair generals.
    LOL. Ad hominem attacks get you nowhere. It is common knowledge that companies mostly try to avoid assigning copyright(money) to others. Just like many non affiliated hackers wont do it either. E.g. Redhat(biggest company), Linux(prime open source success) and Debian(prime all time community distro).

    Yeah sure. What an armchair gang ...

  4. #44
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    347

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by funkSTAR View Post
    LOL. Ad hominem attacks get you nowhere. It is common knowledge that companies mostly try to avoid assigning copyright(money) to others. Just like many non affiliated hackers wont do it either. E.g. Redhat(biggest company), Linux(prime open source success) and Debian(prime all time community distro).

    Yeah sure. What an armchair gang ...
    Ignoring groups that require copyright assignment such as the FSF and Apache project.

    And which of us is the Debian Developer?

  5. #45
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Basement
    Posts
    389

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by directhex View Post
    Ignoring groups that require copyright assignment such as the FSF and Apache project.

    And which of us is the Debian Developer?
    You know very well that assigning to FSF serves to protect copyleft and not circumventing copyleft. And as a deb dev you also know the debate and position of the many devs who refuse to assign away their rights.

  6. #46
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    347

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by funkSTAR View Post
    You know very well that assigning to FSF serves to protect copyleft and not circumventing copyleft.
    Copyleft is not the goal.

    Software Freedom is the goal.

    Copyleft is an effective means towards the goal, but it is not the only means, and it is not exclusive as a solution.

    And I'm fairly sure the current parade of developers abandoning their GNU projects - due to being treated shoddily by the FSF - would have things to say about losing control of their projects to hostile forces (e.g. gnutls)

    And as a deb dev you also know the debate and position of the many devs who refuse to assign away their rights.
    Nobody has to sign away their rights. Everyone makes contributions to Free Software with their eyes wide open as to the licensing and copyright requirements and implications.

  7. #47
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Basement
    Posts
    389

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by directhex View Post
    Copyleft is not the goal.

    Software Freedom is the goal.

    Copyleft is an effective means towards the goal, but it is not the only means, and it is not exclusive as a solution.

    And I'm fairly sure the current parade of developers abandoning their GNU projects - due to being treated shoddily by the FSF - would have things to say about losing control of their projects to hostile forces (e.g. gnutls)

    Nobody has to sign away their rights. Everyone makes contributions to Free Software with their eyes wide open as to the licensing and copyright requirements and implications.
    First, Im not affilated with FSF or support the assignment policy. However I do recognize the ease and power it gives FSF. This is really off topic anyway. And yeah people refusing to assign copyright to FSF is a great benchmark. People wont do it. Even when it is for a good and non commercial cause. Assignment policies suck. And a tool kit is not a place where you want things to go wrong. Porting to a fork or other toolkit is a nightmare. Right now QML is declared to be the future for desktop development while it really was meant for quick and dirty hacking on the phone form factor. It really is a crazy thing left over from the Nokia days.

  8. #48
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Kingston, Jamaica
    Posts
    316

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by funkSTAR View Post
    First, Im not affilated with FSF or support the assignment policy. However I do recognize the ease and power it gives FSF. This is really off topic anyway. And yeah people refusing to assign copyright to FSF is a great benchmark. People wont do it. Even when it is for a good and non commercial cause. Assignment policies suck. And a tool kit is not a place where you want things to go wrong. Porting to a fork or other toolkit is a nightmare. Right now QML is declared to be the future for desktop development while it really was meant for quick and dirty hacking on the phone form factor. It really is a crazy thing left over from the Nokia days.
    You aren't being very coherent with the things you say. Get your thoughts organized then try again.

  9. #49
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Kingston, Jamaica
    Posts
    316

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by funkSTAR View Post
    LOL. You dont know what Copyleft is do you? It is not the existence of GPL. It is the absence of loopholes making the code available at non-restrictive license to others than rightful copyright holders.
    I know what copyleft is. I did not say anything about copyleft. My reply was just to show you that your statement doesn't really stand on a solid base.

  10. #50
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Kingston, Jamaica
    Posts
    316

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ciplogic View Post
    So the same is with Mono. Mono is free software. The same Xobotos OS (Android Java libraries ported to C#) and all their stack. When Qt was at Nokia, all Nokia tools that were working with Qt were F/OSS?

    I develop with MonoDevelop and I see no problem for most of my cross-platform development to use VS as main IDE and to import flawlessly to MD and to do the build, etc.

    The worst part is that MonoDevelop is soon to be a 10 years old project and people did not care much in Linux world about it (and Mono in general), so the parent company will spend more development time to profitable tools.

    I'm curious Digia if it will develop with the same pace still (as Nokia did) to QtCreator and their Qt stack.

    One part which I really don't understand: why Qt is compared with Mono most of the times? I'm an ex-Qt developer and I'm an C# developer. I see weaknesses and strength of both frameworks.

    In many ways I see MonoDevelop having an edge for quick&dirty project that will grow, compared with Qt. With C# you don't have to play with macros for QObject, slots, and such, you have a GC and some services with very few libraries, which themselves are a breeze to work with C# (I talk here about Xml+Reflection, Dependency Injection, Database connectivity, or a simple web server). So, if you have a database application or a web service, you can import it from C#/Visual studio, you recompile with Mono and you add Gtk# UI on it. This looks to me a natural path of development of Mono applications to Linux (or Mac OS X). The code in C# is in many cases smaller and more clear than the C++ equivalent and a great experience (that can be given by Visual Studio + a plugin like JustCode, Resharper or CodeRush) in writing this code.

    Qt has other advantages, mostly: you know upfront that the application has to look the same (or very similar) in all platforms and performance is a concern. I see Qt to enrich a huge C++ codebase with a fancy UI, but if you have to start from scrach and the raw performance is not your ultimate concern, I don't see any company to pick Qt for a desktop application. Developers can create the UI with QML and QWidgets, and write in C++ all the performance sensitive code. After that you're good to go and recompile on every platform Qt is supported. Even Qt will start a bit slower to develop with, is a bit more verbose (because of C++), but at the end, it is modular, it has fairly few bugs and as C++ is the core of the language, sensitive algorithms (like for example a picture processing algorithm) can give the snappiness most users may want.
    I did not say otherwise so I'm not sure why this is a reply to me. I'm all for using Mono and Qt. They are both technically superior to the alternatives available in the FOSS community. I also prefer the syntax of C# over verbose C++. I use C#/.Net on windows and Qt on Windows and Linux. I will use mono on both when Xwt is more thoroughly tested(I hope thy will add a Qt backend).

    It's funny how so many in the FOSS community shun Mono, Qt and other technologies but do not have viable alternatives. If Q and Mono were to disappear today, what would we have available? GTK? EFL? Java, the million other half complete projects?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •