This page permanently redirects to gemini://gemini.techrights.org/2008/04/25/gnome-functionality-wo-csharp/.

● 04.25.08

●● Mono-free GNOME: “Roughly the Same Functionality”

Posted in ECMA, GNOME, GNU/Linux, GPL, Microsoft, Mono, Novell, Patents, RAND at 9:44 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Image contributed by Beranger

Mainly by accident, yesterday I arrived at the following old article. It speaks about GNOME being “written — hopefully — in Mono and C#.” As we pointed out before, a similar article was corrected just recently, several years after it had originally been published. The article stated that GNOME was to be written in C#, but Miguel or somebody else probably felt compelled enough to ‘correct’ that article several years later by contacting editors.

Anyway, here is the opening paragraph from this other long article bearing the headline: The Upcoming GNOME Monarchy of Mono

=> ↺ The Upcoming GNOME Monarchy of Mono

Unix was originally all about not being… Multics. If Mono is to follow a similar nomenclature (just for the kicks), we have to talk about Mono’s upcoming ‘monopolization’ and ‘monarchy’ in the next generation of the Unix programming land. Your see, if everything goes well, in 2 to 3 years most new Gnome user/desktop applications will be written –hopefully– in Mono and C#. Update: Miguel deIcaza replies.

This update from de Icaza contains a clarification about GNOME and Mono, namely:

On Gnome and Mono
I am sure that there will be multiple editions of the same piece of software (One in C#, one in Python, and one in C ;-), so for those of you who for some reason do not want to run Mono, you will always have some C code you can run with roughly the same functionality.

What does “roughly the same functionality” actually mean? Is there a C implementation of Moonlight, for example? Given that only Novell is claimed to have ‘bought’ Mono ‘protection’ from Microsoft (the filings reveal this), does that mean that only those not using Mono are ‘safe’ and are promised to have roughly — whatever that means — the same functionality in GNOME? This relates to our old writings about second-class citizenships [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6]. It was only days ago that we spotted C# getting promoted in the GTK Web pages.

=> 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | C# getting promoted in the GTK Web pages

The main question asked here is not whether GNOME will be getting inherently dependent on Mono. The question is: how hard will it practically be to avoid Mono in GNOME? Or asked differently, how disconnected will the Free desktop pragmatically remain from Microsoft’s software patents? The excuses pointing to ECMA and the RAND are always somewhat comical because these are of course incompatible with the GPL. █

=> incompatible with the GPL

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.

Proxy Information
Original URL
gemini://gemini.techrights.org/2008/04/25/gnome-functionality-wo-csharp
Status Code
Success (20)
Meta
text/gemini;lang=en-GB
Capsule Response Time
282.543377 milliseconds
Gemini-to-HTML Time
0.947941 milliseconds

This content has been proxied by September (3851b).