| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
The FSF warns (again) against MonoThe FSF warns (again) against MonoPosted Jul 18, 2009 17:53 UTC (Sat) by directhex (subscriber, #58519)Parent article: The FSF warns (again) against Mono
Which non-ECMA Microsoft libraries does Tomboy use, then?
Show your working.
Hint: it doesn't, which demonstrates the FSF's inability to apply basic research
(Log in to post comments)
The FSF warns (again) against Mono Posted Jul 19, 2009 15:55 UTC (Sun) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946) [Link]
Whether Tomboy uses it currently or not is not very relevant. My reading of FSF's statement is that Tomboy is being suggested merely as an example of the class of applications which are vulnerable to this problem and F-Spot and others do provide us evidence that it is not a merely theoretical risk. The important point is that Mono apps frequently do not limit themselves to what is provided within the ECMA spec only and therefore still are not protected by the Microsoft community promise. FSF's advise is a good one. Instead of nitpicking, fix the apps so that they do not rely on anything outside what is covered within the promise and ECMA spec. The promise is not as strong as a patent grant and therefore still have some risk but we will limit it significantly. Considering that it is impossible to eliminate the risks and the applications have already been written, this is the least we should be doing now.
The FSF warns (again) against Mono Posted Jul 19, 2009 19:34 UTC (Sun) by directhex (subscriber, #58519) [Link]
Wait a sec... "Instead of nitpicking, fix the apps so that they do not rely on anything outside what is covered within the promise and ECMA spec." - it's nitpicking to say JOB DONE in the case of the SPECIFICALLY NAMED APP?
How does that even make sense?
"Do this, but don't say you've done it"?
The FSF warns (again) against Mono Posted Jul 19, 2009 19:40 UTC (Sun) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946) [Link]
Fixing it one single app hardly solves the problem being mentioned. Tomboy is just one example and probably the smallest. The list is longer and includes other popular applications. Fix the rest of them and then say you have addressed the entire class of problems. In fact, Mono applications developers should have done this long back since it hardly the first time this problem is being raised. Till then, FSF's point remains valid.
The FSF warns (again) against Mono Posted Jul 19, 2009 21:10 UTC (Sun) by directhex (subscriber, #58519) [Link]
Which leaves only one real sticking point - ADO.NET, the System.Data namespace.
So. In your considered legal opinion, what needs to be done to make SQlite access "safe"? Which specific details of System.Data make it dangerous? What do apps need to do? Is renaming it to "Panda.Data" enough for all legal risk to suddenly vanish, in your mind? If not, what do you suggest instead?
The FSF warns (again) against Mono Posted Jul 20, 2009 7:40 UTC (Mon) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946) [Link]
I suggest contacting SFLC if you must continue using Mono
The FSF warns (again) against Mono Posted Jul 20, 2009 8:58 UTC (Mon) by kragil (guest, #34373) [Link]
Nice try, but mono evangelists are not really into real legal advice.
They prefer to make it up themselves.
The FSF warns (again) against Mono Posted Jul 20, 2009 9:22 UTC (Mon) by directhex (subscriber, #58519) [Link]
Oh, and that's your considered legal opinion is it?
The FSF warns (again) against Mono Posted Jul 20, 2009 9:31 UTC (Mon) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946) [Link]
If you want legal opinions ask the lawyers. That's my non legal opinion :-)
|
|
||||||||||||