| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
SourceSourcePosted Jul 17, 2008 18:52 UTC (Thu) by dmarti (subscriber, #11625)Parent article: Mono man accuses Mac Gtk+ fans of jeopardizing Linux desktop (the Register) The Mainstream Media seems a little confused here. Miguel's version has the details?
(Log in to post comments)
The Register is hardly mainstream Posted Jul 17, 2008 18:57 UTC (Thu) by JoeBuck (subscriber, #2330) [Link] There's often entertaining to read, and very snarky, but their take on things is usually rather skewed compared to the mainstream trade press's take.
The Register is hardly mainstream Posted Jul 17, 2008 18:58 UTC (Thu) by JoeBuck (subscriber, #2330) [Link] s/There's/They are/, not sure how I messed that one up.
The Register is hardly mainstream Posted Jul 17, 2008 21:05 UTC (Thu) by salimma (subscriber, #34460) [Link] Indeed; more GTK+/GNOME developers are concerned over Mono dependencies creeping in (ndesk-dbus and gnome-keyring-sharp are *replacements* for the C/GObject-based dbus and gnome-keyring), rather than their platform going cross-platform. Given that the alternative, Qt, works much better on OS X than GTK+ does right now, having a more widespread use of GTK+ on Mac is a win-win proposition: more applications get written in it, and they benefit from more open competition (some Mac applications, even limiting the scope to open-sourced ones, are better than their Un*x counterparts, for instance, BibDesk)
The Register is hardly mainstream Posted Jul 18, 2008 18:20 UTC (Fri) by bkor (guest, #27950) [Link] That is a dependency for Mono apps, not for C (non-Mono) apps. So it is *not* a replacement as you seem to suggest. As to the: > Indeed; more GTK+/GNOME developers are concerned over > Mono dependencies creeping in [..] rather than their > platform going cross-platform. I saw no such concern.
The Register is hardly mainstream Posted Jul 19, 2008 18:43 UTC (Sat) by salimma (subscriber, #34460) [Link] Incorrect: ndesk-dbus, just like the C counterpart, are both meant to be used solely over D-BUS, regardless of programming language: http://www.ndesk.org/DBusSharp There are proposals for it to completely replace the C version, though I hope it does not come to that, because the licensing is more flexible (MIT vs GPL). Of course, since using D-BUS does not mean linking against the D-BUS bridge, the licensing concerns are probably exaggerated to begin with.
Source Posted Jul 17, 2008 20:09 UTC (Thu) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link] That's much more sane. The Register got pretty much everything ridiculously wrong, ignored every substantive point Miguel made, and manufactured a conspiracy theorist out of whole cloth. I'd like to say I'm shocked but the lie would be too brazen even for me...
|
|
||||||||||||