GNOME & Mono Made Love At Microsoft Last Week

[RealNC]

And multi-platform games? Let me guess, those developers are evil because they should have written it in GCC intrinsics from day 1.

What does this have to do with Gnome pushing .NET applications? I don't really give a flying fsck what multi-platform games are using.

Why not?

"Server" and "version control system" are not an analogue for "software development framework specification".

Bulldog dumped several pieces of Microsoft software for Free alternatives. Microsoft license fees: reduced. Free Software deployment: increased. How is that not relevant to someone doing exactly the same thing the other way round - i.e. switching from closed apps on a closed OS to open apps on a closed OS, rather than Bulldog's case (closed apps on a closed OS to closed apps on an open OS)

Did I miss something and Bulldog bought Gnome or something?

".NET developers not welcome here, go back to where you came from" ?

Are you admitting with that statement that Gnome is now a .NET product?

[directhex]

What does this have to do with Gnome pushing .NET applications? I don't really give a flying fsck what multi-platform games are using.

You love this word "pushing", don't you? I don't think you understand what it means.

"Server" and "version control system" are not an analogue for "software development framework specification".

They are as far as business app deployment goes.

Did I miss something and Bulldog bought Gnome or something?

Wat?

Are you admitting with that statement that Gnome is now a .NET product?

No, because I'm not retarded, so I wouldn't make such statements.

[RealNC]

They are as far as business app deployment goes.

Oh really? So "Debian" is a "Microsoft Server 2008" implementation in the same sense that Mono is a .NET implementation? Debian is no such thing, and you know it.

Wat?

You state how Bulldog was able to "get away from Microsoft" by using Mono. I don't see how that translates to Gnome. Is Gnome trying to get away from Microsoft too? No. Why is it using .NET then?

No, because I'm not retarded, so I wouldn't make such statements.

But you're projecting other people's reasons to use .NET upon Gnome. Gnome has no reason to use .NET in the sense you're describing here, namely as a method of getting rid of Microsoft software.

[directhex]

Oh really? So "Debian" is a "Microsoft Server 2008" implementation in the same sense that Mono is a .NET implementation? Debian is no such thing, and you know it.

You're arguing for a very weird thing.

"Debian with Mono" is a "platform we need to run our app" implementation in the same sense that "Windows Server with .NET" is a "platform we need to run our app" implementation. Why does that concept confuse you?

Bulldog's company were able to replace, in his own numbers, about 40% of their Microsoft software with Free software, and you're arguing that this is a bad thing. If it hadn't have been for Mono, Debian would not have been a "platform we need to run our app" implementation and would not have replaced any Microsoft software.

You state how Bulldog was able to "get away from Microsoft" by using Mono. I don't see how that translates to Gnome. Is Gnome trying to get away from Microsoft too? No. Why is it using .NET then?

GNOME is trying to appeal to developers who want to develop on and for Free Software platforms. Why are you opposed to Free Software development?

But you're projecting other people's reasons to use .NET upon Gnome. Gnome has no reason to use .NET in the sense you're describing here, namely as a method of getting rid of Microsoft software.

I don't think you're particularly interested in the history of why Mono exists.

Suffice it to say that there has long been an overlap between GNOME and Mono developers, which is why Mono's support for GNOME technologies like Gtk+ has always been first-class compared to its support for non-GNOME technologies like Qt or WinForms. And at that point, Mono is as valid a framework as, say, Python, for developing apps for GNOME. Developers are free to make their own decisions. This hackfest was specifically to help improve the quality of Mono's support for GNOME technologies (e.g. GTK+3) and apps on GNOME (e.g. Tasque or Banshee), but that's not some statement on Mono being "pushed" or any such nonsense. If you had the first fucking clue about Free Software governance (and GNOME governance in particular) you'd understand that.

[RealNC]

"Debian with Mono" is a "platform we need to run our app" implementation in the same sense that "Windows Server with .NET" is a "platform we need to run our app" implementation. Why does that concept confuse you?

It doesn't confuse me. It's simply irrelevant to the discussion. "Debian with Mono" is definitely not the platform Gnome needs to run its apps.

Bulldog's company were able to replace, in his own numbers, about 40% of their Microsoft software with Free software, and you're arguing that this is a bad thing. If it hadn't have been for Mono, Debian would not have been a "platform we need to run our app" implementation and would not have replaced any Microsoft software.

So, what is Gnome replacing? I think it's C/Gtk. See below.

GNOME is trying to appeal to developers who want to develop on and for Free Software platforms. Why are you opposed to Free Software development?

So does XFCE. And KDE. And many others. I don't see *them* pushing .NET with "festivals of love."

I don't think you're particularly interested in the history of why Mono exists.

Suffice it to say that there has long been an overlap between GNOME and Mono developers, which is why Mono's support for GNOME technologies like Gtk+ has always been first-class compared to its support for non-GNOME technologies like Qt or WinForms. And at that point, Mono is as valid a framework as, say, Python, for developing apps for GNOME. Developers are free to make their own decisions. This hackfest was specifically to help improve the quality of Mono's support for GNOME technologies (e.g. GTK+3) and apps on GNOME (e.g. Tasque or Banshee), but that's not some statement on Mono being "pushed" or any such nonsense. If you had the first fucking clue about Free Software governance (and GNOME governance in particular) you'd understand that.

First, please don't resort to personal insults. Second, just throwing the word "governance" around doesn't make your arguments any more valid. Third, Gnome's embrace of .NET seems more like an admittance of failure to me. I'm speculating here, but I suspect that Gnome devs wanted something better than C and Gtk. C++ with Qt sure looked tasty, but their pride prevented them from using it. After all, they've been bashing it for a decade. So they went .NET.

Someone should make a "PHAIL" demotivational poster for that one.

[TheBlackCat]

I am confused here. Is it true or false that Mono is implementing parts of .Net that are not part of the ECMA standards and not explicitly covered under Microsoft's community promise?

[bwat47]

I am confused here. Is it true or false that Mono is implementing parts of .Net that are not part of the ECMA standards and not explicitly covered under Microsoft's community promise?

True, mono does implement things like winforms that are not part of the standard. (but many mono programs don't even use winforms...)

[directhex]

It doesn't confuse me. It's simply irrelevant to the discussion. "Debian with Mono" is definitely not the platform Gnome needs to run its apps.

So you're trying to restrict the discussion back to only GNOME, then. Fine, fine. Let's go with that.

So, what is Gnome replacing? I think it's C/Gtk. See below.

GNOME is a platform for the Free Software desktop. What it's replacing is closed desktops. It's offering up apps, written in a variety of languages, to replace various closed apps.

Mono explicitly can't replace C/Gtk, since Gtk# is a binding on top of Gtk+. It doesn't make any sense.

So does XFCE. And KDE. And many others. I don't see *them* pushing .NET with "festivals of love."

You don't see hackfests for the other desktops? Funny, I see them running several hackfests, certainly KDE.

And perhaps GNOME isn't averse to backing a hackfest for improvements in GNOME apps like Banshee, when Banshee contributes about ten thousand dollars a year to the GNOME foundation?

I'm speculating here, but I suspect that Gnome devs wanted something better than C and Gtk. C++ with Qt sure looked tasty, but their pride prevented them from using it. After all, they've been bashing it for a decade. So they went .NET.

I don't think you know much about Free Software.

Qt wasn't GPL-compatible until 2000. Prior to that, it was under a variety of dubiously-Free licenses. That's why GNOME came to exist - because basing the Free Software desktop on a semi-closed platform like Qt, as the KDE developers were doing, was pretty much antithetical to the idea of Free Software.

GNOME used LGPL for its core libraries, to enable the maximum number of developer without compromising on Free Software ideals - i.e. the GNOME stack itself is copyleft, without telling developers what they can or cannot do as would have been the case with GPL. Which is why apps like VMware popped up, using GTK+ and not Qt.

Qt's first true Free release, in 2000, was GPL, not LGPL, meaning a Qt-based desktop was useless for anyone wanting to make their own licensing decisions.

Qt didn't pick up an actually developer-friendly license, LGPL, until 2009, with Qt 4.5. By this point, Mono had been around for 8 years, offering a developer-friendly platform on top of the developer-friendly-licensed Gtk

I find it half amusing and half depressing just how much anti-Mono crusaders obsess about how GNOME should have always used Qt, as if the licensing problems that caused GNOME's existence were somehow irrelevant.

Now that Qt is LGPL? Sure, it's a decent enough choice of toolkit - assuming you want to be forced into using C++ (some developers actually like other languages, and binding to C++ is MUCH harder than binding to C), and assuming you don't mind throwing decades of toolkits and libraries in the bin.

But then we're up to 2009 - and I just can't think of who in their right mind would think GNOME should be rewritten entirely from scratch in 2009, throwing away decades of tech and support, for very little gain.

So where does Mono fit in here? It's just another framework with bindings to Gtk+ etc. And that's all it is. No different from, say, the Python and GObject Introspection hackfests in 2011. Hackfest proposal gets submitted, GNOME is focus, sponsorship gets approved. It's not a grand conspiracy.

[RealNC]

So you're trying to restrict the discussion back to only GNOME, then. Fine, fine. Let's go with that.

Isn't it how it started?

GNOME is a platform for the Free Software desktop. What it's replacing is closed desktops. It's offering up apps, written in a variety of languages, to replace various closed apps.

What closed apps are replaced in Gnome by using .NET?

You don't see hackfests for the other desktops? Funny, I see them running several hackfests, certainly KDE.

No, I don't see .NET festivals by KDE. Do you?

And perhaps GNOME isn't averse to backing a hackfest for improvements in GNOME apps like Banshee, when Banshee contributes about ten thousand dollars a year to the GNOME foundation?

I'm sure you mentioned somewhere in this thread that money has nothing to do with this?

I don't think you know much about Free Software.

I know quite a bit about it. It seems *you* don't know much about Microsoft software.

Qt wasn't GPL-compatible until 2000. Prior to that

Irrelevant. Gnome didn't start loving .NET in 2000.

[directhex]

Isn't it how it started?

I believe you were the first person to start talking about the "Whole Linux Ecosystem"

What closed apps are replaced in Gnome by using .NET?

Microsoft OneNote.

No, I don't see .NET festivals by KDE. Do you?

I don't see any .NET hackfest proposals for KDE. Do you?

I'm sure you mentioned somewhere in this thread that money has nothing to do with this?

Not Microsoft money. But Banshee does help pay the GNOME foundation's bills. Considering the question of money in versus money out, Banshee's contributions to GNOME's coffers subsidize all sorts of activities.

I know quite a bit about it. It seems *you* don't know much about Microsoft software.

Why would I give a shit about Microsoft software? I don't find it interesting. I'm here for the Free Software, thanks. You can keep your Windows.

Irrelevant. Gnome didn't start loving .NET in 2000.

Tomboy became a by-default app in 2006 (GNOME 2.16). Gtk# 1.0 is from late 2004. These dates are very old, and still significantly older than Qt's addition of LGPL as a license.