Image of the glider from the Game of Life by John Conway
Skip to content

Mono And RHEL

With all the whoo hah about why GNote sucks for Tomboy, mono is patent encumbered software by Microsoft, people eating FUD for breakfast, and other things, one argument I've failed to read is this:

GNote can bring Tomboy to Red Hat Enterprise Linux, as Red Hat will not ship mono with its flagship product.

Whatever Red Hat's reasons are for not shipping mono with RHEL, GNote is a major win for the open source community. Different people and different operating systems have different needs, and providing yet another application to fill a need is what Free Software is all about. This gives Red Hat the opportunity, if it desires, to bring Tomboy to RHEL through GNote.

Lastly, let's not forget the Free Software Definition, which it seems GNote is taking advantage of:

  • Run the program, for any purpose
  • Study how the program works, and adapt it to your needs
  • Redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor
  • Improve the program, and release your improvements to the public, so that the whole community benefits

{ 5 } Comments

  1. Jason using Firefox 3.0.8 on Ubuntu 64 bits | April 21, 2009 at 5:25 am | Permalink

    Fully agree ... choice and availability is what the Ubuntu philosophy is all about.
    Microsoft has only granted immunity to Novell users/clients, and Mono's GPL does not cover Mono’s Windows compatibility stack - of which TomBoy uses extensively. There is a lot to be wary of from MS when using Mono’s Windows compatibility stack, and IMHO thus lots to be wary of from TomBoy.

  2. Igor using Firefox 3.0.8 on Ubuntu | April 21, 2009 at 5:28 am | Permalink

    The people who use RHEL will use a real life notepad to take notes anyways...

  3. Tom using Firefox 3.1b3 on Fedora 64 bits | April 21, 2009 at 5:32 am | Permalink

    I agree, behaving like a closed source vendor is not helpful at all.

  4. Paul Kishimoto using Firefox 3.0.8 on Ubuntu | April 21, 2009 at 7:50 am | Permalink

    (via Planet Ubuntu) Good point about RHEL, I completely missed that.

    I find there are funny echoes of "You're hurting America!" in "It is harmful for the community" ...and it has long been evident how weak the former statement is as an argument. "The Iraq war will turn out badly? Don't say that, you're helping the terrorists and hurting America!"

  5. Jo Shields using Firefox 3.0.8 on Ubuntu 64 bits | April 21, 2009 at 3:35 pm | Permalink

    "Jason" here has been copy-pasting the exact same spiel anywhere he thinks it'll get eyeballs. He doesn't stick around anywhere long enough to explain his meaning (i.e. leaving a flaming bag on the doorstep), so we can only assume.

    Let's assume "Mono’s Windows compatibility stack" refers to the System.Windows.Forms namespace (I can't imagine what else he could mean). He's either misinformed, or deliberately lying. Here's the full list of assemblies used by Tomboy:
    directhex@desire:~$ monodis --assemblyref /usr/lib/tomboy/Tomboy.exe | grep Name
    Name=mscorlib
    Name=Mono.Posix
    Name=gtk-sharp
    Name=gnome-panel-sharp
    Name=glib-sharp
    Name=gdk-sharp
    Name=System.Xml
    Name=Mono.Addins
    Name=System
    Name=pango-sharp
    Name=Mono.Addins.Gui
    Name=Mono.Addins.Setup
    Name=gnome-sharp
    Name=gconf-sharp
    Name=gconf-sharp-peditors
    Name=NDesk.DBus
    Name=NDesk.DBus.GLib

    Now, of those, which of them are not CLEARLY Free Software, Mono-specific (but cross-platform) libraries designed to leverage Free Software technologies? These ones:
    Name=mscorlib
    Name=System.Xml
    Name=System

    I doubt anyone expecting to be taken seriously would claim that things like GConf or GTK are part of a "Windows compatibility stack". Now, what of these three here? especially the scary-looking "ms" in "mscorlib"?

    Well, take a trundle over to the ECMA-335 spec, available here: http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/files/ECMA-ST/Ecma-335.pdf - and jump down to Partition IV section 5, "The standard libraries". Page 473, if it helps. This makes you aware that there are a number of core libraries in the international ISO/ECMA standard. The "BCL" library in section 5? THAT's our "Name=mscorlib". The "XML" library? Well, that's "Name=System.Xml". "Network" library? "Name=System".

    So, in short: can anyone explain what the hell "Jason" is suggesting? because if he's suggesting there's anything which isn't either an ISO spec (i.e. the way C90 is an ISO spec) or ground-up Free (like DBus or Pango or whatever) then as you can see, he's wrong.

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared.

Switch to our mobile site