| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Interview: Miguel de Icaza (DesktopLinux.com)Interview: Miguel de Icaza (DesktopLinux.com)Posted Oct 10, 2008 9:53 UTC (Fri) by russell (subscriber, #10458)In reply to: Interview: Miguel de Icaza (DesktopLinux.com) by kripkenstein Parent article: Interview: Miguel de Icaza (DesktopLinux.com)
Obviously he feel passionate about it, and good for him. So, he's not a poet. Is LWN only for dry topics that nobody has strong opinions on?
Try joining the conversation rather than shutting it down.
(Log in to post comments)
Interview: Miguel de Icaza (DesktopLinux.com) Posted Oct 10, 2008 9:57 UTC (Fri) by Los__D (subscriber, #15263) [Link]
Search dulles post history.
I call troll.
Interview: Miguel de Icaza (DesktopLinux.com) Posted Oct 10, 2008 10:02 UTC (Fri) by kripkenstein (subscriber, #43281) [Link]
I am with you on strong opinions - it's perfectly fine to have those, and in fact many of us do (including me). However, it is *still* unwarranted to say "what kind of a freak would ...". That doesn't foster debate, that's flamebait.
You asked for my take on the issue, so here it is:
First, Miguel is not much involved with GNOME at this point anyhow (is he even involved at all?), so there is no need to fork it. GNOME is a nice project that is doing well and I see no problematic influences on it.
Second, I do have concerns about Mono, namely that it might have patent problems and that it allows .Net to appear to be cross-platform (which of course it isn't). I wouldn't have started Mono myself. That said, I have found myself needing to run C# applications recently and Mono has made that possible for me on Linux, so I am conflicted about this. On the one hand I would use Java/Python/etc. for a new project, but on the other hand I do appreciate the great amount of work that went into Mono and that it has been useful to me.
Interview: Miguel de Icaza (DesktopLinux.com) Posted Oct 10, 2008 13:26 UTC (Fri) by dgm (subscriber, #49227) [Link]
Maybe someone should start a porting tool?
Something that uses the mono C# parser to generate Java source. Microsoft already has one (or used to), which obviously works the other way. Even better would be a bytecode translator, but that would require to re-implement the .NET class libraries (a la Wine). That would be a useful project for those wanting to break the lock-in.
Interview: Miguel de Icaza (DesktopLinux.com) Posted Oct 10, 2008 13:40 UTC (Fri) by zlynx (subscriber, #2285) [Link]
Did you just say, in a thread about Mono, that someone should write a .NET porting tool and re-implement .NET class libraries in order to break the lock-in?
That is what Mono IS! A bytecode interpreter and JIT for MS CLR and a reimplementation of .NET class libraries.
Interview: Miguel de Icaza (DesktopLinux.com) Posted Oct 11, 2008 11:23 UTC (Sat) by dgm (subscriber, #49227) [Link]
There's a difference: a porting tool allows you to let .NET behind once the port is done.
Interview: Miguel de Icaza (DesktopLinux.com) Posted Oct 13, 2008 18:11 UTC (Mon) by epa (subscriber, #39769) [Link]
Uh, yes, and Mono lets you leave .NET behind once you have ported your
application to Mono. There are no dependencies on Microsoft proprietary code whatsoever. What exactly do you have in mind?
|
|
||||||||||||