Steven D'Aprano wrote:
Let's reword your concern slightly:It's difficult to take a claim of “free” seriously for technologies (including, but not limited to, HTML, CSS, C++, XML, Public Key Cryptography, packet-based multimedia, IPv6) that knowingly or unknowingly [the later not being a defence against infringement] implement techniques covered by specific idea patents held by an entity that allegedly demonstrates every intention, or at least some intention, of wielding them to restrict the freedom of software recipients.
Steve, this is a straw man argument. Its not good argument to reword 'his' concern, nor to provide a non-related analogy, nor to build a straw man that you can easily knock down. In doing so, your argument loses merit (bad enough) but also you end up missing the other point.
No one is 'singling out' Mono. Mono and .NET are just examples of evil proprietary frameworks|software designed to lock-in market share and usurp freedom. There are *many* other examples that we might talk about. But the main point is that if you value freedom, you will not support proprietary frameworks. So, if a software package, like just for example (Cobra), relies on .NET (or Mono) then Cobra is a bad thing for freedom in computer scinece. If Python is free software ( at least GPL compatible license ) then Python is a 'good thing' from the standpoint of freedom in computer science. That was the comparison.
There is no FUD here... NO FEAR Absolutely CERTAIN NO DOUBT kind regards, m harris -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
