06.17.09
New Push for Gnote in Ubuntu by Default
Summary: Another step towards abolishment of Mono as by-default component
A NEW version of Gnote has just been released (thanks to Tony Manco for the headsup) and someone else — without connection to this site (we only received a headsup in IRC after it had happened) — has proposed that Ubuntu should swap Tomboy with Gnote, which is already in Ubuntu. Meanwhile, another user of Ubuntu argues that the vast majority of people do not need Mono.
I’m not a .net developer, I don’t need this. The second statement I though was very presumptuous (to say the least). Mono is their “gift to the world” and positioned to be the leading choice for Linux application developers? I’m not a developer, and (laughing) I’m not a gift to planet earth (although I like to think I am at times), but I suspect these statements are somewhat boasting in nature? However, personal thought aside. Score 1 for the “Nos”, I’m not a .net developer, nor a Linux developer, so I don’t need this.
The force which pushes the hardest for more and more of Mono in Ubuntu is currently a Ubuntu MOTU and Debian packager. The argument here is not over the inclusion of Mono; it’s its inclusion by default. What is this urge to spread Mono further and more widely? Mono helps Microsoft because there is factual evidence to show this [1, 2, 3]. As Oiaohm puts it, “Mono cannot run all .NET applications due to native .NET applications able to do native calls. So Mono has to run in Wine to support some applications. Nice way to create something you can demo as failing on Linux really.” █
“As many of you may know, we’ve actually kind of broadened the product portfolio of Visual Studio, targeting all the way from the low end with students and hobbyists, kind of competitive in that Linux space, making sure that every developer has a copy of .NET and is trained in writing .NET solutions. [...] I think it will really help us in our competition with open source.”
–Eric Rudder, Senior Vice President, Microsoft
Needs Sunlight said,
June 17, 2009 at 3:09 pm
Say again how average users can have their voices heard in Ubuntu and Debian?
Roy Schestowitz Reply:
June 17th, 2009 at 3:26 pm
I reckon developers decide. But there are mechanisms for feedback from users. It’s a tough situation trying to find balance.
eet said,
June 17, 2009 at 3:53 pm
In Debian, only those who code have a voice, not those with the biggest mouths (which often call themselves ‘users’ and think that using somethings gives you rights over that something).
Jose_X Reply:
June 17th, 2009 at 5:09 pm
Developers and communities that sufficiently ignore their users and other developers that don’t contribute directly (or people whose contributions they do not immediately recognize) have their work forked or outright abandoned by others.
Debian is not there. I’m just replying to your comment. And if most developers did not agree with a few troublemaker developers, they would vote down the troublemakers or else fork themselves.
Everyone has a right to do their own thing, but I don’t have an obligation to follow you blindly or help you out in any way.
twitter Reply:
June 17th, 2009 at 11:19 pm
Eet, you are neither a coder nor a user, nor someone with a clue about free software. Debian is a distribution. They take code from upstream and package it in ways that meets user needs. A quick read of the Debian Social Contract and the free software definition will clear things up for anyone confused by Mr. Eet’s big mouth. Free software is all about the users and Debian developers are basically users.
The problem here is that Novell and M$ are paying people to develop and shove patent encumbered software into free software definitions. From M$ and Novell’s statements, it’s clear that mono is a trap and only freely distributeable by Novell. A few statements from M$ could clear up all of this instantly but they won’t make any promisses about free software other than to tax it. Watching from the sidelines, it’s also clear their Trojan horse is something of a nag. Free software without a real community of developers will have a technical quality like non free software, especially when it’s corporate guided. The free software community is not so easily fooled and is reacting in a common sense way. Mono, .NET and friends deserves no more attention than Visual Basic does. By all reliable reports Mono is not really portable, has nothing unique to offer, is patent encumbered and is owned by a sworn enemy of free software.
eet Reply:
June 18th, 2009 at 2:14 am
>Debian developers are basically users
That is basically so much horse manure.
You don’t get a voice with Debian if you don’t contribute – call it developing or coding, you don’t have a vote.
Jose_X said,
June 17, 2009 at 4:25 pm
>> As Oiaohm puts it, “Mono cannot run all .NET applications due to native .NET applications able to do native calls. So Mono has to run in Wine to support some applications. Nice way to create something you can demo as failing on Linux really.”
Windows can run mono but Linux cannot run MSdotnet.
So the game becomes one clearly favoring Microsoft.
If we are going to follow standards, be open, play fairly, etc — things that make it possible for Microsoft (and anyone else) to run our apps — we might as well work to optimize for Linux rather than to follow the sorts of standards optimized for Microsoft’s goals which make it the easiest possible for Microsoft to sock us. (and that’s not even looking at the patent issue).
>> “As many of you may know, we’ve actually kind of broadened the product portfolio of Visual Studio, targeting all the way from the low end with students and hobbyists, kind of competitive in that Linux space, making sure that every developer has a copy of .NET and is trained in writing .NET solutions. [...] I think it will really help us in our competition with open source.”
This reminds me of how the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundry is big on “education” and on helping to provide access to Windows software.
And Bill wants everyone to contribute to his foundation. More free money that can be used to further the interests of and control by Microsoft by subsidizing their marketing, “drug addiction”, and competitor snuffing campaigns.
Gosh, but all of this is not enough. We need to help Microsoft further. Linux is just too evil; it gives users just too much choice and an option away from monopoly control. Evil Linux. Bad Linux. Let’s make Microsoft’s investments in dotnet patents payoff like a bunch of winning lottery tickets. If we think we are making things easy for Microsoft, we aren’t; we always need to find a way to give them more.