This page permanently redirects to gemini://gemini.techrights.org/2008/01/31/gnome-mono-depenency-dbus/.
Posted in Deception, GNOME, GNU/Linux, Microsoft, Mono, Patents at 10:47 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
That whole Mono entanglement [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33] seems to be getting worse all the time, but almost nobody cares to notice. GNOME developers think we are harsh and try to shoot the messenger, but all we are trying to do is help by drawing attention to the problem. It won’t go away if you ignore it.
=> 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33
Inspired by something in BoycottNovell, Beranger.org (formerly Beranger on GNOME) summarises the latest issue fairly well:
=> ↺ summarises the latest issue fairly well
Soon, it will be IMPOSSIBLE to “unMonofy” your GNOME, as once you will get rid of Tomboy, F-Spot, Beagle, Banshee, Muine, Telepathy, whatever, you won’t be able to remove Mono, as it will be required as a GNOME system library!
Yesterday, before the analysis from Beranger.org, we passed evidence on to a knowledgeable figure arguing that Jeff Waugh had promised this would not happen. We received the following response:
Can you send a link to a public page where Waugh makes that assurance? If so, I can try to make sure it gets some mileage.
It’s one thing I never learned as a kid and have no idea how to go about trying: how do deal with bull*****ers like Waugh, who even as they are speaking you know they are lying or have no intent of following through but courtesy and protocol otherwise require accepting the statements at face value.
One solution is to nip the mono and excise all MS tech from GNOME. A second, in parallel, is to low-key, calmly and quietly insist on KDE and Fluxbox, especially in popular distros like Ubuntu and Fedora.
For context, see this thread in the GNOME Foundation’s mailing list. This long discussion was started by Richard Stallman, who happened to be aware of our work. Therein you’ll find claims that GNOME does not depend on Mono. Jeff made that claim repeatedly in this site, but it would take some digging to find several individual examples because he left about a hundred comments.
=> ↺ thread in the GNOME Foundation’s mailing list | ↺ some digging to find several individual examples
“GNOME is apparently becoming Mono-dependent, which is a shame.”Our contact later added: “If you come across anything showing the discrepancy between word and deed, that would be very useful.”
It is, by this stage, becoming clearer that Jeff Waugh’s promise was not trustworthy. GNOME is apparently becoming Mono-dependent, which is a shame. We saw that coming.
Remember that Mono is a Novell project and only Novell customers receive so-called 'protection' for the use Mono (due to expire in January 2012). Need we even start to wonder again why the ‘Novell part’ part of the GNOME Foundation supports OOXML and even helps it? Remember that Microsoft pays Novell to support OOXML. So, Novell seems to have resorted to fear as a strategy for selling itself and it’s poisoning GNOME for everybody else who uses it. The image below is a depiction of Novell. Please address this problem before it becomes truly irreversible.
=> only Novell customers receive so-called 'protection' | expire in January 2012 | supports OOXML and even helps it | Microsoft pays Novell to support OOXML
Unless our assertion is wrong, we deserve some apologies from various people, including Jeff, for smears claiming that we were wrong. █
Share in other sites/networks: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
Permalink Send this to a friend
=> Permalink | ↺ Send this to a friend
=> Techrights
➮ Sharing is caring. Content is available under CC-BY-SA.
text/gemini;lang=en-GBThis content has been proxied by September (3851b).