Re: [Mono-list] Ubuntu
Does the latest mono develop work on the version of mono shipped with ubuntu 10.04? no Does the latest mono develop work with the version of mono shipped with ubuntu? yes Your argument would hold up if the above was not the cause, the problem is that mono is moving far to fast for that approach to be viable. So mono develop has added badger ports to their download page. (its a PPA for people follow this thread) but its not supported by the mono team like on windows and mac and opensuse. Do you realize that ubuntu has more mono users then those other "supported" operating systems. The banshee usage stats prove this. Windows has first class support and yet no one uses mono on windows because .net is faster and more stable. Even mono develop for windows runs on .net and not on mono. How much effort does the mono team go to create mono installers for windows? isn't that the responsibility of Microsoft to make mono work on windows? What about Mac how much effort does the mono team spend making mono run on Mac isn't that the responsibility of Apple? So it's not about user base. The has been as must as stated on here that its because ubuntu is linux. So the mono team doesn't support ubuntu because its a linux distro. Linux distro are not important to the mono team. Closed operating systems are much more important. Even if people don't use mono on those closed systems. The exception is openuses which just so happens to be funded by Novell interesting how that works I just finished lessening to the ubuntu uk podcast in which they interview Jo Shields aka directhex (the guy who maintains the badgerports PPA) and what he says about mono on ubuntu is quite interesting and is definitely worth a listen. Here is the link http://podcast.ubuntu-uk.org/2010/07/21/s03e12-the-country-fair/ Ubuntu is one of the most mono accepting non novell distros out there in terms of what mono applications they include by default, but what we get from mono team amounts to a slap in the face. Does windows include mono applications by default? no. Does apple? no. Does ubuntu? yes. So how does mono thank ubuntu for its support? by giving it the big middle finger. Microsoft and Apple do not package mono or include mono by default. And mono thanks them for this by providing them with first class support. It doesn't make any sense to me at all. (I sent the email to the sender by mistake because the reply button in gmail replies to the sender not the list.) On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 12:57 PM, Bojan Rajkovic wrote: > Does GNOME maintain PPA's like this? Does any project? > > On Aug 10, 2010 6:35 PM, "Daniel Hughes" wrote: > > No one expects mono to be pushed out as a automatic update on ubuntu. > We do however expect a PPA which is on even footing with windows, mac > etc. I.E same day support to the same quality. And supported by the > mono team. > > That is all. > > On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 2:18 AM, Bojan Rajkovic > wrote: >> >> > >> > On 08/10/2010 10:03 AM, Christopher Monroe wrote: >> >> >> >> I'll second the complaint about the foru... >> >> > ___ >> > Mono-list maillist - mono-l...@lists.ximian.co... > > ___ > Mono-list maillist - mono-l...@lists.ximian.com > http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list > > ___ Mono-list maillist - Mono-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
[Mono-list] LiveCd for version 2.6.7 missing in downloads
Hi, there is missing LiveCD in download section (version 2.6.7.) . Will be the LiveCD available for this version? Thanks, Jan -- View this message in context: http://mono.1490590.n4.nabble.com/LiveCd-for-version-2-6-7-missing-in-downloads-tp2321117p2321117.html Sent from the Mono - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ Mono-list maillist - Mono-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
Re: [Mono-list] Ubuntu
Hello, You have a couple of options here: (a) Step up and participate in your favorite distribution packaging effort (b) Raise funds to fund the salary for someone to maintain the packages on a continuous basis (c) Wait for the existing Debian/Ubuntu team to package the software for you (d) Use a distribution that we provide packages for (e) Lobby your favorite distribution to pay developers to ensure that Mono packages are packaged and delivered promptly. If you want to do (a), there is a mailing list for this: http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-packagers-list Mono ships source code, and as a service, we consider where we need to fill in the gaps. We considered both Windows and Mac important platforms to target due to the users on those platforms and the fact that the chances are low that someone from that community would step up to do the work. Ubuntu, Debian, and various BSD have motivated maintainers that follow their relevant policies and are more knowledgeable of the procedures to get the software properly distributed for those platforms than we do. Miguel On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 6:54 AM, Daniel Hughes wrote: > Does the latest mono develop work on the version of mono shipped with > ubuntu 10.04? no > Does the latest mono develop work with the version of mono shipped > with ubuntu? yes > > Your argument would hold up if the above was not the cause, the > problem is that mono is moving far to fast for that approach to be > viable. > > So mono develop has added badger ports to their download page. (its a > PPA for people follow this thread) but its not supported by the mono > team like on windows and mac and opensuse. > > Do you realize that ubuntu has more mono users then those other > "supported" operating systems. The banshee usage stats prove this. > Windows has first class support and yet no one uses mono on windows > because .net is faster and more stable. Even mono develop for windows > runs on .net and not on mono. > > How much effort does the mono team go to create mono installers for > windows? isn't that the responsibility of Microsoft to make mono work > on windows? > > What about Mac how much effort does the mono team spend making mono > run on Mac isn't that the responsibility of Apple? > > So it's not about user base. The has been as must as stated on here > that its because ubuntu is linux. So the mono team doesn't support > ubuntu because its a linux distro. Linux distro are not important to > the mono team. Closed operating systems are much more important. Even > if people don't use mono on those closed systems. The exception is > openuses which just so happens to be funded by Novell interesting > how that works > > I just finished lessening to the ubuntu uk podcast in which they > interview Jo Shields aka directhex (the guy who maintains the > badgerports PPA) and what he says about mono on ubuntu is quite > interesting and is definitely worth a listen. Here is the link > http://podcast.ubuntu-uk.org/2010/07/21/s03e12-the-country-fair/ > > Ubuntu is one of the most mono accepting non novell distros out there > in terms of what mono applications they include by default, but what > we get from mono team amounts to a slap in the face. > > Does windows include mono applications by default? no. Does apple? no. > Does ubuntu? yes. So how does mono thank ubuntu for its support? by > giving it the big middle finger. > > Microsoft and Apple do not package mono or include mono by default. > And mono thanks them for this by providing them with first class > support. > > It doesn't make any sense to me at all. > > (I sent the email to the sender by mistake because the reply button in > gmail replies to the sender not the list.) > > On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 12:57 PM, Bojan Rajkovic > wrote: > > Does GNOME maintain PPA's like this? Does any project? > > > > On Aug 10, 2010 6:35 PM, "Daniel Hughes" wrote: > > > > No one expects mono to be pushed out as a automatic update on ubuntu. > > We do however expect a PPA which is on even footing with windows, mac > > etc. I.E same day support to the same quality. And supported by the > > mono team. > > > > That is all. > > > > On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 2:18 AM, Bojan Rajkovic > > wrote: > >> > >> > > >> > On 08/10/2010 10:03 AM, Christopher Monroe wrote: > >> >> > >> >> I'll second the complaint about the foru... > >> > >> > ___ > >> > Mono-list maillist - mono-l...@lists.ximian.co... > > > > ___ > > Mono-list maillist - Mono-list@lists.ximian.com > > http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list > > > > > ___ > Mono-list maillist - Mono-list@lists.ximian.com > http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list > ___ Mono-list maillist - Mono-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
Re: [Mono-list] Ubuntu
I think you are arguing against "The Linux Way" TM. Here are some other programming language download pages: GCC: http://gcc.gnu.org/install/binaries.html PHP: http://php.net/downloads.php Java: http://www.java.com/en/download/manual.jsp Python: http://www.python.org/download/ You will note that not a single one of them offers Ubuntu (or any other Linux) packages, and most of them provide Windows and Mac installers. If you want to use a newer version of Mono or any of these other languages than what your distro provides, you follow The Linux Way, which is to download the tarball and build it yourself. Jonathan On 8/11/2010 5:54 AM, Daniel Hughes wrote: > Does the latest mono develop work on the version of mono shipped with > ubuntu 10.04? no > Does the latest mono develop work with the version of mono shipped > with ubuntu? yes > > Your argument would hold up if the above was not the cause, the > problem is that mono is moving far to fast for that approach to be > viable. > > So mono develop has added badger ports to their download page. (its a > PPA for people follow this thread) but its not supported by the mono > team like on windows and mac and opensuse. > > Do you realize that ubuntu has more mono users then those other > "supported" operating systems. The banshee usage stats prove this. > Windows has first class support and yet no one uses mono on windows > because .net is faster and more stable. Even mono develop for windows > runs on .net and not on mono. > > How much effort does the mono team go to create mono installers for > windows? isn't that the responsibility of Microsoft to make mono work > on windows? > > What about Mac how much effort does the mono team spend making mono > run on Mac isn't that the responsibility of Apple? > > So it's not about user base. The has been as must as stated on here > that its because ubuntu is linux. So the mono team doesn't support > ubuntu because its a linux distro. Linux distro are not important to > the mono team. Closed operating systems are much more important. Even > if people don't use mono on those closed systems. The exception is > openuses which just so happens to be funded by Novell interesting > how that works > > I just finished lessening to the ubuntu uk podcast in which they > interview Jo Shields aka directhex (the guy who maintains the > badgerports PPA) and what he says about mono on ubuntu is quite > interesting and is definitely worth a listen. Here is the link > http://podcast.ubuntu-uk.org/2010/07/21/s03e12-the-country-fair/ > > Ubuntu is one of the most mono accepting non novell distros out there > in terms of what mono applications they include by default, but what > we get from mono team amounts to a slap in the face. > > Does windows include mono applications by default? no. Does apple? no. > Does ubuntu? yes. So how does mono thank ubuntu for its support? by > giving it the big middle finger. > > Microsoft and Apple do not package mono or include mono by default. > And mono thanks them for this by providing them with first class > support. > > It doesn't make any sense to me at all. > > (I sent the email to the sender by mistake because the reply button in > gmail replies to the sender not the list.) > > On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 12:57 PM, Bojan Rajkovic > wrote: >> Does GNOME maintain PPA's like this? Does any project? >> >> On Aug 10, 2010 6:35 PM, "Daniel Hughes" wrote: >> >> No one expects mono to be pushed out as a automatic update on ubuntu. >> We do however expect a PPA which is on even footing with windows, mac >> etc. I.E same day support to the same quality. And supported by the >> mono team. >> >> That is all. >> >> On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 2:18 AM, Bojan Rajkovic >> wrote: >>> On 08/10/2010 10:03 AM, Christopher Monroe wrote: > > I'll second the complaint about the foru... >>> ___ Mono-list maillist - mono-l...@lists.ximian.co... >> >> ___ >> Mono-list maillist - Mono-list@lists.ximian.com >> http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list >> >> > ___ > Mono-list maillist - Mono-list@lists.ximian.com > http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list > > ___ Mono-list maillist - Mono-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
Re: [Mono-list] Ubuntu
Hello, If you want to use a newer version of Mono or any of these other > languages than what your distro provides, you follow The Linux Way, > which is to download the tarball and build it yourself. > There is a little bit of rationale behind this that has escaped the discussion, and Jonathan's list of languages reminded me of this. The reason why runtimes, compilers and other pieces of infrastructure tend to not be packaged is because the code could break existing code in the distribution. Some reasons include: * Distribution makes changes to the software to suit their design * Distribution applies specific patches for bugs that were reported to them, but the fixes were not upstreamed * Distributions applies patches for features that improve the integration on their system * Quality assurance and system tests You will notice that the distributions that we support are either those that we actually maintain Mono for, so my team plays a double role there (OpenSUSE) or distributions where Mono is not included by default, and where we install Mono on a separate directory (our own SLES and RHEL/CentOS, MacOS, Windows). Miguel ___ Mono-list maillist - Mono-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
[Mono-list] Desktop Silverlight applicaition for Linux
Hi, Well, I am planning to develop a desktop application using Silverlight and want the same app to be available for Linux too. I intend to use Microsoft's Multi Point technology where we can connect more than one mouse with our machine and different pointers are available for each one of the mice. Previously, I got a suggestion -- Sure, Silverlight isn't "intended" for the desktop, but there's no reason why you can't embed a silverlight engine in your application. It's been done before such as for the Mac NY Times Reader. You'll have better luck working with Moonlight, which targets the Silverlight API, which is a subset of full WPF I am new to Linux but have some experience in Windows apps and I wanted to know if Multi Point could be implemented in Linux? -- *fingers crossed* After all, there's nothing impossible in programming!!! -- View this message in context: http://mono.1490590.n4.nabble.com/Desktop-Silverlight-applicaition-for-Linux-tp2321439p2321439.html Sent from the Mono - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ Mono-list maillist - Mono-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
Re: [Mono-list] Desktop Silverlight applicaition for Linux
On 11.08.2010 17:48, optimus_prime wrote: > Previously, I got a suggestion > -- > Sure, Silverlight isn't "intended" for the desktop, but there's no reason > why you can't embed a silverlight engine in your application. It's been done > before such as for the Mac NY Times Reader. You'll have better luck working > with Moonlight, which targets the Silverlight API, which is a subset of full > WPF > I am new to Linux but have some experience in Windows apps and > I wanted to know if Multi Point could be implemented in Linux? There is a reason not to use Silverlight in a dektop application: Last time I checked the license (a couple of months ago), Microsoft did not allow to redistribute Silverlight. This means that it has to be downloaded from MS and installed on the target machine at installation time of the application that embeds it. Robert ___ Mono-list maillist - Mono-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
Re: [Mono-list] Ubuntu
I had the same questions you had. I am a Mint user (the 4 largest OS in world, after ubuntu, OSX, Win32), and Mint is very pro "user experience" out of the box, and given were it is authored, it has lessor issue with licensing/patents and such. They actually have had (if I remember correctly) moonlight installed out of the box, in addition to codec's and such that are not normally on other distros. I did find Joe's badger ports and it does the trick for me. I also am hoping I can assist in that effort in some way, as I am glued to Mint. I understand your issues/concerns and also the other side as well (see Miguel's and other posts). It really can be seen as a marketing trade off. It costs to create these and support them, BUT I can't help thinking that investing the time better supporting Mint/Ubuntu, that it would (but only a guess) pay off by bringing more people into the community, there by getting a huge return on investment, one that makes it self sufficient. So to that end I do see it as odd. However, there needs to be community, and free contribution to the efforts, and hopefully, ideally, that can handle the task (in the case of Mint/Ubuntu). The other side of looking at it is, with Mint/Ubuntu being so huge, and statistically speaking, should generate a large pool of free resource to look after the task of its own repos for Mono. This brings me to another question. Suppose a combination of resources can build the Ubuntu/Mint packages (solid builds as they progress, even some targeted just for developers with the latest and greatest). It helps to have the packages (PPA) come from some place official. I know about badger ports, I trust it, so I install from it, but thats just me. It seems to me that from the trust aspect, to cater to the most paranoid, doesn't the PPA have to (should) come from go-mono.com, or the domain of the distro? It may not always be possible to hang it off the disto's domain, so that leaves go-mono.com (and its aliases), but "hosting" a PPA or equivalent at go-mono, that involves ..? This reminds me of packman from when i used opensuse. It is listed on the opensuse site, so one get the "official" feeling, as apposed to just a repo added from some domain that technically could be (but usual unlikely) rogue. So putting aside the question of where the effort comes from for better ubuntu/mint support assuming its there, where can the PPA "officially" be housed for the paranoid (and rightfully so) consumer? Also, in it being "officially" housed, it also then benefits by that exposure, that is it has become "official", its were people will naturally look for it, which has brought us around full circle. tl On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 22:54:37 +1200 Daniel Hughes wrote: > Does the latest mono develop work on the version of mono shipped with > ubuntu 10.04? no > Does the latest mono develop work with the version of mono shipped > with ubuntu? yes > > Your argument would hold up if the above was not the cause, the > problem is that mono is moving far to fast for that approach to be > viable. > > So mono develop has added badger ports to their download page. (its a > PPA for people follow this thread) but its not supported by the mono > team like on windows and mac and opensuse. > > Do you realize that ubuntu has more mono users then those other > "supported" operating systems. The banshee usage stats prove this. > Windows has first class support and yet no one uses mono on windows > because .net is faster and more stable. Even mono develop for windows > runs on .net and not on mono. > > How much effort does the mono team go to create mono installers for > windows? isn't that the responsibility of Microsoft to make mono work > on windows? > > What about Mac how much effort does the mono team spend making mono > run on Mac isn't that the responsibility of Apple? > > So it's not about user base. The has been as must as stated on here > that its because ubuntu is linux. So the mono team doesn't support > ubuntu because its a linux distro. Linux distro are not important to > the mono team. Closed operating systems are much more important. Even > if people don't use mono on those closed systems. The exception is > openuses which just so happens to be funded by Novell interesting > how that works > > I just finished lessening to the ubuntu uk podcast in which they > interview Jo Shields aka directhex (the guy who maintains the > badgerports PPA) and what he says about mono on ubuntu is quite > interesting and is definitely worth a listen. Here is the link > http://podcast.ubuntu-uk.org/2010/07/21/s03e12-the-country-fair/ > > Ubuntu is one of the most mono accepting non novell distros out there > in terms of what mono applications they include by default, but what > we get from mono team amounts to a slap in the face. > > Does windows include mono applications by default? no. Does apple? no. > Does ubuntu? yes. So how does mono thank ubu
[Mono-list] Mono or Linux interfering with Google calendar API? Works on Windows
I have a Winforms app that reads from Google calendars, using the Google calendar API. It works fine on Windows, but on Mono I keep getting a "401 Authorization Required" error. The code is the same and I have copied all of the reference libraries (DLLs) from the Windows machine to the Linux machine. Same Google account, I can read events and write events fine but when I run the app under Mono I get the 401 error. Anyone have any idea what might be going on? -- View this message in context: http://mono.1490590.n4.nabble.com/Mono-or-Linux-interfering-with-Google-calendar-API-Works-on-Windows-tp2321780p2321780.html Sent from the Mono - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ Mono-list maillist - Mono-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
Re: [Mono-list] Ubuntu
I know Jo Shields (http://apebox.org/wordpress/) has is packaging Mono for Ubuntu. However, he may suffer from not having enough exposure, as people keep asking where to find the latest Mono release for Ubuntu. Wouldn't the solution simply be for the Mono download page to have a link to Jo's builds? The only problem I can think of is small delays before they're ready, compared to the other builds. ted leslie wrote: > > I had the same questions you had. > I am a Mint user (the 4 largest OS in world, after ubuntu, OSX, Win32), > and Mint is very > pro "user experience" out of the box, and given were it is authored, it > has lessor issue with > licensing/patents and such. They actually have had (if I remember > correctly) > moonlight installed out of the box, in addition to codec's and such that > are not normally on other distros. > I did find Joe's badger ports and it does the trick for me. I also am > hoping I can assist in > that effort in some way, as I am glued to Mint. > I understand your issues/concerns and also the other side as well (see > Miguel's and other posts). > > It really can be seen as a marketing trade off. It costs to create these > and support them, > BUT I can't help thinking that investing the time better supporting > Mint/Ubuntu, that it would > (but only a guess) pay off by bringing more people into the community, > there by getting a huge > return on investment, one that makes it self sufficient. So to that end I > do see it as odd. > However, there needs to be community, > and free contribution to the efforts, and hopefully, ideally, that can > handle the task (in the case > of Mint/Ubuntu). The other side of looking at it is, with Mint/Ubuntu > being so huge, and statistically > speaking, should generate a large pool of free resource to look after the > task of its own repos for Mono. > > This brings me to another question. Suppose a combination of resources can > build the Ubuntu/Mint > packages (solid builds as they progress, even some targeted just for > developers with the latest and greatest). > It helps to have the packages (PPA) come from some place official. I know > about badger ports, I trust it, so I > install from it, but thats just me. It seems to me that from the trust > aspect, to cater to the > most paranoid, doesn't the PPA have to (should) come from go-mono.com, or > the domain of the > distro? It may not always be possible to hang it off the disto's domain, > so that leaves go-mono.com > (and its aliases), but "hosting" a PPA or equivalent at go-mono, that > involves ..? > This reminds me of packman from when i used opensuse. It is listed on the > opensuse site, so one > get the "official" feeling, as apposed to just a repo added from some > domain that technically could > be (but usual unlikely) rogue. > > So putting aside the question of where the effort comes from for better > ubuntu/mint support > assuming its there, where can the PPA "officially" be housed for the > paranoid (and rightfully so) > consumer? Also, in it being "officially" housed, it also then benefits by > that exposure, that is > it has become "official", its were people will naturally look for it, > which has brought us around > full circle. > > tl > > On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 22:54:37 +1200 > Daniel Hughes wrote: > >> Does the latest mono develop work on the version of mono shipped with >> ubuntu 10.04? no >> Does the latest mono develop work with the version of mono shipped >> with ubuntu? yes >> >> Your argument would hold up if the above was not the cause, the >> problem is that mono is moving far to fast for that approach to be >> viable. >> >> So mono develop has added badger ports to their download page. (its a >> PPA for people follow this thread) but its not supported by the mono >> team like on windows and mac and opensuse. >> >> Do you realize that ubuntu has more mono users then those other >> "supported" operating systems. The banshee usage stats prove this. >> Windows has first class support and yet no one uses mono on windows >> because .net is faster and more stable. Even mono develop for windows >> runs on .net and not on mono. >> >> How much effort does the mono team go to create mono installers for >> windows? isn't that the responsibility of Microsoft to make mono work >> on windows? >> >> What about Mac how much effort does the mono team spend making mono >> run on Mac isn't that the responsibility of Apple? >> >> So it's not about user base. The has been as must as stated on here >> that its because ubuntu is linux. So the mono team doesn't support >> ubuntu because its a linux distro. Linux distro are not important to >> the mono team. Closed operating systems are much more important. Even >> if people don't use mono on those closed systems. The exception is >> openuses which just so happens to be funded by Novell interesting >> how that works >> >> I just finished lessening to the ubuntu uk podcast in which they >> interview Jo Sh
Re: [Mono-list] Ubuntu
I think mono should adopt the Jo Shields badgerports PPA as the "offical" ubuntu PPA. However in my mind this would involve more then just putting it on the download page. The mono team would have to make commitment to working with Jo to ensure that it was available from day one when a new release is made and that it was stable. It that was to happen I would be a happy man :) (sorry stifu I sent it to you instead of the list ... again) On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 9:19 AM, Stifu wrote: > > I know Jo Shields (http://apebox.org/wordpress/) has is packaging Mono for > Ubuntu. However, he may suffer from not having enough exposure, as people > keep asking where to find the latest Mono release for Ubuntu. > Wouldn't the solution simply be for the Mono download page to have a link to > Jo's builds? The only problem I can think of is small delays before they're > ready, compared to the other builds. > > > ted leslie wrote: >> >> I had the same questions you had. >> I am a Mint user (the 4 largest OS in world, after ubuntu, OSX, Win32), >> and Mint is very >> pro "user experience" out of the box, and given were it is authored, it >> has lessor issue with >> licensing/patents and such. They actually have had (if I remember >> correctly) >> moonlight installed out of the box, in addition to codec's and such that >> are not normally on other distros. >> I did find Joe's badger ports and it does the trick for me. I also am >> hoping I can assist in >> that effort in some way, as I am glued to Mint. >> I understand your issues/concerns and also the other side as well (see >> Miguel's and other posts). >> >> It really can be seen as a marketing trade off. It costs to create these >> and support them, >> BUT I can't help thinking that investing the time better supporting >> Mint/Ubuntu, that it would >> (but only a guess) pay off by bringing more people into the community, >> there by getting a huge >> return on investment, one that makes it self sufficient. So to that end I >> do see it as odd. >> However, there needs to be community, >> and free contribution to the efforts, and hopefully, ideally, that can >> handle the task (in the case >> of Mint/Ubuntu). The other side of looking at it is, with Mint/Ubuntu >> being so huge, and statistically >> speaking, should generate a large pool of free resource to look after the >> task of its own repos for Mono. >> >> This brings me to another question. Suppose a combination of resources can >> build the Ubuntu/Mint >> packages (solid builds as they progress, even some targeted just for >> developers with the latest and greatest). >> It helps to have the packages (PPA) come from some place official. I know >> about badger ports, I trust it, so I >> install from it, but thats just me. It seems to me that from the trust >> aspect, to cater to the >> most paranoid, doesn't the PPA have to (should) come from go-mono.com, or >> the domain of the >> distro? It may not always be possible to hang it off the disto's domain, >> so that leaves go-mono.com >> (and its aliases), but "hosting" a PPA or equivalent at go-mono, that >> involves ..? >> This reminds me of packman from when i used opensuse. It is listed on the >> opensuse site, so one >> get the "official" feeling, as apposed to just a repo added from some >> domain that technically could >> be (but usual unlikely) rogue. >> >> So putting aside the question of where the effort comes from for better >> ubuntu/mint support >> assuming its there, where can the PPA "officially" be housed for the >> paranoid (and rightfully so) >> consumer? Also, in it being "officially" housed, it also then benefits by >> that exposure, that is >> it has become "official", its were people will naturally look for it, >> which has brought us around >> full circle. >> >> tl >> >> On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 22:54:37 +1200 >> Daniel Hughes wrote: >> >>> Does the latest mono develop work on the version of mono shipped with >>> ubuntu 10.04? no >>> Does the latest mono develop work with the version of mono shipped >>> with ubuntu? yes >>> >>> Your argument would hold up if the above was not the cause, the >>> problem is that mono is moving far to fast for that approach to be >>> viable. >>> >>> So mono develop has added badger ports to their download page. (its a >>> PPA for people follow this thread) but its not supported by the mono >>> team like on windows and mac and opensuse. >>> >>> Do you realize that ubuntu has more mono users then those other >>> "supported" operating systems. The banshee usage stats prove this. >>> Windows has first class support and yet no one uses mono on windows >>> because .net is faster and more stable. Even mono develop for windows >>> runs on .net and not on mono. >>> >>> How much effort does the mono team go to create mono installers for >>> windows? isn't that the responsibility of Microsoft to make mono work >>> on windows? >>> >>> What about Mac how much effort does the mono team spend making mono >>> run on Mac isn'
Re: [Mono-list] Ubuntu
@miguel By the way what I'm taking from your comments is that if ubuntu was to refuse to package mono and include default mono applications mono support for ubuntu would actually improve. I wonder if someone should tell them.. On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 9:32 AM, Daniel Hughes wrote: > I think mono should adopt the Jo Shields badgerports PPA as the > "offical" ubuntu PPA. > > However in my mind this would involve more then just putting it on the > download page. > The mono team would have to make commitment to working with Jo to > ensure that it was available from day one when a new release is made > and that it was stable. > > It that was to happen I would be a happy man :) > > (sorry stifu I sent it to you instead of the list ... again) > > On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 9:19 AM, Stifu wrote: >> >> I know Jo Shields (http://apebox.org/wordpress/) has is packaging Mono for >> Ubuntu. However, he may suffer from not having enough exposure, as people >> keep asking where to find the latest Mono release for Ubuntu. >> Wouldn't the solution simply be for the Mono download page to have a link to >> Jo's builds? The only problem I can think of is small delays before they're >> ready, compared to the other builds. >> >> >> ted leslie wrote: >>> >>> I had the same questions you had. >>> I am a Mint user (the 4 largest OS in world, after ubuntu, OSX, Win32), >>> and Mint is very >>> pro "user experience" out of the box, and given were it is authored, it >>> has lessor issue with >>> licensing/patents and such. They actually have had (if I remember >>> correctly) >>> moonlight installed out of the box, in addition to codec's and such that >>> are not normally on other distros. >>> I did find Joe's badger ports and it does the trick for me. I also am >>> hoping I can assist in >>> that effort in some way, as I am glued to Mint. >>> I understand your issues/concerns and also the other side as well (see >>> Miguel's and other posts). >>> >>> It really can be seen as a marketing trade off. It costs to create these >>> and support them, >>> BUT I can't help thinking that investing the time better supporting >>> Mint/Ubuntu, that it would >>> (but only a guess) pay off by bringing more people into the community, >>> there by getting a huge >>> return on investment, one that makes it self sufficient. So to that end I >>> do see it as odd. >>> However, there needs to be community, >>> and free contribution to the efforts, and hopefully, ideally, that can >>> handle the task (in the case >>> of Mint/Ubuntu). The other side of looking at it is, with Mint/Ubuntu >>> being so huge, and statistically >>> speaking, should generate a large pool of free resource to look after the >>> task of its own repos for Mono. >>> >>> This brings me to another question. Suppose a combination of resources can >>> build the Ubuntu/Mint >>> packages (solid builds as they progress, even some targeted just for >>> developers with the latest and greatest). >>> It helps to have the packages (PPA) come from some place official. I know >>> about badger ports, I trust it, so I >>> install from it, but thats just me. It seems to me that from the trust >>> aspect, to cater to the >>> most paranoid, doesn't the PPA have to (should) come from go-mono.com, or >>> the domain of the >>> distro? It may not always be possible to hang it off the disto's domain, >>> so that leaves go-mono.com >>> (and its aliases), but "hosting" a PPA or equivalent at go-mono, that >>> involves ..? >>> This reminds me of packman from when i used opensuse. It is listed on the >>> opensuse site, so one >>> get the "official" feeling, as apposed to just a repo added from some >>> domain that technically could >>> be (but usual unlikely) rogue. >>> >>> So putting aside the question of where the effort comes from for better >>> ubuntu/mint support >>> assuming its there, where can the PPA "officially" be housed for the >>> paranoid (and rightfully so) >>> consumer? Also, in it being "officially" housed, it also then benefits by >>> that exposure, that is >>> it has become "official", its were people will naturally look for it, >>> which has brought us around >>> full circle. >>> >>> tl >>> >>> On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 22:54:37 +1200 >>> Daniel Hughes wrote: >>> Does the latest mono develop work on the version of mono shipped with ubuntu 10.04? no Does the latest mono develop work with the version of mono shipped with ubuntu? yes Your argument would hold up if the above was not the cause, the problem is that mono is moving far to fast for that approach to be viable. So mono develop has added badger ports to their download page. (its a PPA for people follow this thread) but its not supported by the mono team like on windows and mac and opensuse. Do you realize that ubuntu has more mono users then those other "supported" operating systems. The banshee usage stats prove this. Windows has first class support
Re: [Mono-list] Ubuntu
> @miguel By the way what I'm taking from your comments is that if > ubuntu was to refuse to package mono and include default mono > applications mono support for ubuntu would actually improve. I wonder > if someone should tell them.. > I can not comment as the above sentence turned out to be impossible to parse. You might want to clarify, unless you are trolling, in which case, dont bother. ___ Mono-list maillist - Mono-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
Re: [Mono-list] Ubuntu
After looking at the go-mono.com site closer, I would suggest the following: On download page, there is a "other" (linux tm image) link/button, that then bring up another line of 2. Mono for Unsupported or Community-Supported Distribution Novell does not offer support for your distribution. A number of distributions are supported by their own communities instead. Please select your platform below: Debian Ubuntu Other -- I would propose (dealing just with Ubuntu in this discussion) have Ubuntu listed as "Community-Supported", and not tied to the "Unsupported" banner. As well, have it always display (rather then switched into the page only when the "other" is selected). Also perhaps adding in "Ubuntu derived i.e. Mint, Kubuntu, etc." as a further descriptor under the link. Then when it goes to the Ubuntu specific page, all the warnings and explanation can stay. It then forwards off to badgerports.org, where I would suggest (to Joe), that this become more of an official page (or change the domain and create new site, i.e. go-mono-ubuntu.com, etc). This all under the condition the effort/results meets the mono community definition of a "Community-Supported" distro. I am not sure what that condition is however, but I assume it has to do with showing a history of support from member of the community, and that it generally works. Assuming this could happen, it then leaves the questions of who does this distro package (Joe should get help) [ I'd love to help, and I assume there are others], and, how is the badgerports (or new) domain funded/hosted (does the mono community as a whole, and/or Novell help with this)? Maybe this could be hosted off of the Mint domain as well, probably should be hosted at two places for redundancy. Just my 0.02 tl On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 09:32:52 +1200 Daniel Hughes wrote: > I think mono should adopt the Jo Shields badgerports PPA as the > "offical" ubuntu PPA. > > However in my mind this would involve more then just putting it on the > download page. > The mono team would have to make commitment to working with Jo to > ensure that it was available from day one when a new release is made > and that it was stable. > > It that was to happen I would be a happy man :) > > (sorry stifu I sent it to you instead of the list ... again) > > On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 9:19 AM, Stifu wrote: > > > > I know Jo Shields (http://apebox.org/wordpress/) has is packaging Mono for > > Ubuntu. However, he may suffer from not having enough exposure, as people > > keep asking where to find the latest Mono release for Ubuntu. > > Wouldn't the solution simply be for the Mono download page to have a link to > > Jo's builds? The only problem I can think of is small delays before they're > > ready, compared to the other builds. > > > > > > ted leslie wrote: > >> > >> I had the same questions you had. > >> I am a Mint user (the 4 largest OS in world, after ubuntu, OSX, Win32), > >> and Mint is very > >> pro "user experience" out of the box, and given were it is authored, it > >> has lessor issue with > >> licensing/patents and such. They actually have had (if I remember > >> correctly) > >> moonlight installed out of the box, in addition to codec's and such that > >> are not normally on other distros. > >> I did find Joe's badger ports and it does the trick for me. I also am > >> hoping I can assist in > >> that effort in some way, as I am glued to Mint. > >> I understand your issues/concerns and also the other side as well (see > >> Miguel's and other posts). > >> > >> It really can be seen as a marketing trade off. It costs to create these > >> and support them, > >> BUT I can't help thinking that investing the time better supporting > >> Mint/Ubuntu, that it would > >> (but only a guess) pay off by bringing more people into the community, > >> there by getting a huge > >> return on investment, one that makes it self sufficient. So to that end I > >> do see it as odd. > >> However, there needs to be community, > >> and free contribution to the efforts, and hopefully, ideally, that can > >> handle the task (in the case > >> of Mint/Ubuntu). The other side of looking at it is, with Mint/Ubuntu > >> being so huge, and statistically > >> speaking, should generate a large pool of free resource to look after the > >> task of its own repos for Mono. > >> > >> This brings me to another question. Suppose a combination of resources can > >> build the Ubuntu/Mint > >> packages (solid builds as they progress, even some targeted just for > >> developers with the latest and greatest). > >> It helps to have the packages (PPA) come from some place official. I know > >> about badger ports, I trust it, so I > >> install from it, but thats just me. It seems to me that from the trust > >> aspect, to cater to the > >> most paranoid, doesn't the PPA have to (should) co
Re: [Mono-list] Ubuntu
I know that is a bit offtopic, but I think that for Ubuntu users, isn't too hard install lastest versions of Mono compiling it from tarball. There are some guides and tutorials that explain in detail step by step the installation, and it explains all dependencies that must be satisfied previously if you want to install Mono in a fresh installation of Ubuntu. In mi case, I use Ubuntu 10.04 and I enjoy Mono 2.6.7 with Monodevelop 2.4 (and Moonlight 2.0 SDK), both compiled from tarball. Maybe, an alternative, is to publish an official guide that explain how to install Mono compiling from tarball in a fresh installation of a Linux distribution, so that everyone that wants to install Mono from tarball in his favorite Linux distribution, can do as easily as possible. Daniel Soto... I'm other :-) 2010/8/11 Miguel de Icaza > > @miguel By the way what I'm taking from your comments is that if >> ubuntu was to refuse to package mono and include default mono >> applications mono support for ubuntu would actually improve. I wonder >> if someone should tell them.. >> > > I can not comment as the above sentence turned out to be impossible to > parse. > > You might want to clarify, unless you are trolling, in which case, dont > bother. > > ___ > Mono-list maillist - Mono-list@lists.ximian.com > http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list > > ___ Mono-list maillist - Mono-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
Re: [Mono-list] Ubuntu
Quote "so my team plays a double role there (OpenSUSE) or distributions where Mono is not included by default" So if ubuntu did not support mono by including it by default. Then you would package it. Ubuntu would get first class support from the mono team. We would get new versions of mono as they are released and so mono support on ubuntu would be improved. Was I trolling? maybe. This is born from frustration. In which case I apologize and will attempt to be more constructive. On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 10:25 AM, Miguel de Icaza wrote: > >> @miguel By the way what I'm taking from your comments is that if >> ubuntu was to refuse to package mono and include default mono >> applications mono support for ubuntu would actually improve. I wonder >> if someone should tell them.. > > I can not comment as the above sentence turned out to be impossible to > parse. > You might want to clarify, unless you are trolling, in which case, dont > bother. ___ Mono-list maillist - Mono-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
Re: [Mono-list] Ubuntu
On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 12:38 AM, Daniel Hughes wrote: > Quote > "so my team plays a double role there (OpenSUSE) or distributions > where Mono is not included by default" > > So if ubuntu did not support mono by including it by default. Then you > would package it. Ubuntu would get first class support from the mono > team. We would get new versions of mono as they are released and so > mono support on ubuntu would be improved. I could be wrong, but I think you don't understand how packaging works in linux distributions, which is why you're not "getting" the explanations that have been put forth already. The developer of the application provides the code, and the distribution packages it. Each distro has their own rules and software for packaging, as well as package mantainers and their own schedule for providing new versions of packages. If a distro chooses to not update a package to a more current version, it can be because of many things: 1) they have custom patches that need porting 2) they prefer not to touch system packages until the next major distro release 3) they have long qa/approval cycles for updates 4) a million other reasons, as miguel explained earlier. We do the best we can supporting OSs and distros that don't have package maintainers (or not even a concept of that) or where we're the maintainers ourselves. We're not the Debian or Ubuntu maintainers. Go look at the homepages of pretty much any software available on Ubuntu and note that they don't provide packages, just tarballs. That's how things work in the Linux world. I think we all understand your frustration about this, but insisting on it when everyone has explained it to you repeatedly is not going to make it happen any differently. Ubuntu is extremely well supported, it's dead easy to compile your own Mono if you want, you can use Jo's PPA if you prefer, there's basically a bunch of different ways to update Mono on your system with little effort. You might not like how the Linux packaging process works, but that's how it is, and discussing the pros and cons of particular philosophy is a topic for other mailing lists, I think. andreia gaita ___ Mono-list maillist - Mono-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
Re: [Mono-list] Desktop Silverlight applicaition for Linux
I haven't read the EULA so take this for what it's worth ... but if you're embedding Moonlight (not Silverlight) then Silverlight's license should not apply. With that said, why would you want to embed anyway? Why not just create a SL out-of-browser app? The functionality was introduced in SL3 and even greater support for the scenario is now in SL4. Now there are still some issues. 1. I don't know much about "MultiPoint" (disclaimer: this is the first I heard of it and just quickly looked at a video) but it looks *very* specific to Windows and I doubt very much you can integrate it with Linux. 2. Moonlight is always behind in its release schedule to Silverlight and I don't think out-of-browser is fully supported yet. On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 12:16 PM, Robert Jordan wrote: > On 11.08.2010 17:48, optimus_prime wrote: > >> Previously, I got a suggestion >> -- >> Sure, Silverlight isn't "intended" for the desktop, but there's no reason >> why you can't embed a silverlight engine in your application. It's been done >> before such as for the Mac NY Times Reader. You'll have better luck working >> with Moonlight, which targets the Silverlight API, which is a subset of full >> WPF >> I am new to Linux but have some experience in Windows apps and >> I wanted to know if Multi Point could be implemented in Linux? > > There is a reason not to use Silverlight in a dektop application: > Last time I checked the license (a couple of months ago), > Microsoft did not allow to redistribute Silverlight. > > This means that it has to be downloaded from MS and installed > on the target machine at installation time of the application > that embeds it. > > Robert > > ___ > Mono-list maillist - mono-l...@lists.ximian.com > http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list > ___ Mono-list maillist - Mono-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
Re: [Mono-list] Ubuntu
Ubuntu does not believe it is its responsibility to update mono between OS releases. Mono does not believe it is its responsibility to provide ubuntu packages for new mono releases. Users fall into a gap between the two. And must compile from source or use unsupported third party PPA's if and when they are available. This is the way it is and this discussion shows that it will not change. Thank you all for explaining this to me. I see no reason for any further discussion here. On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 1:14 PM, Andreia Gaita wrote: > On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 12:38 AM, Daniel Hughes wrote: >> Quote >> "so my team plays a double role there (OpenSUSE) or distributions >> where Mono is not included by default" >> >> So if ubuntu did not support mono by including it by default. Then you >> would package it. Ubuntu would get first class support from the mono >> team. We would get new versions of mono as they are released and so >> mono support on ubuntu would be improved. > > I could be wrong, but I think you don't understand how packaging works > in linux distributions, which is why you're not "getting" the > explanations that have been put forth already. > > The developer of the application provides the code, and the > distribution packages it. Each distro has their own rules and software > for packaging, as well as package mantainers and their own schedule > for providing new versions of packages. If a distro chooses to not > update a package to a more current version, it can be because of many > things: 1) they have custom patches that need porting 2) they prefer > not to touch system packages until the next major distro release 3) > they have long qa/approval cycles for updates 4) a million other > reasons, as miguel explained earlier. > > We do the best we can supporting OSs and distros that don't have > package maintainers (or not even a concept of that) or where we're the > maintainers ourselves. We're not the Debian or Ubuntu maintainers. Go > look at the homepages of pretty much any software available on Ubuntu > and note that they don't provide packages, just tarballs. That's how > things work in the Linux world. I think we all understand your > frustration about this, but insisting on it when everyone has > explained it to you repeatedly is not going to make it happen any > differently. Ubuntu is extremely well supported, it's dead easy to > compile your own Mono if you want, you can use Jo's PPA if you prefer, > there's basically a bunch of different ways to update Mono on your > system with little effort. > > You might not like how the Linux packaging process works, but that's > how it is, and discussing the pros and cons of particular philosophy > is a topic for other mailing lists, I think. > > andreia gaita > ___ > Mono-list maillist - mono-l...@lists.ximian.com > http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list > ___ Mono-list maillist - Mono-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
Re: [Mono-list] Ubuntu
On 08/11/2010 09:24 PM, Daniel Hughes wrote: > Ubuntu does not believe it is its responsibility to update mono > between OS releases. > It's their responsibility to update *all* of their packages between OS releases. If they don't, then they presumably had a reason not to. It's kinda hard for them not to take responsibility for the packages they ship ;-) > Mono does not believe it is its responsibility to provide ubuntu > packages for new mono releases. > > Users fall into a gap between the two. And must compile from source or > use unsupported third party PPA's if and when they are available. > Jo (aka Directhex) is the guy that packages Mono for Ubuntu proper, so his PPA isn't really "third party". Hope that helps, Jeff ___ Mono-list maillist - Mono-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
Re: [Mono-list] Desktop Silverlight applicaition for Linux
Multipoint would need support from the X server. I don't know if it exists or not. On Aug 11, 2010 11:48 AM, "optimus_prime" wrote: Hi, Well, I am planning to develop a desktop application using Silverlight and want the same app to be available for Linux too. I intend to use Microsoft's Multi Point technology where we can connect more than one mouse with our machine and different pointers are available for each one of the mice. Previously, I got a suggestion -- Sure, Silverlight isn't "intended" for the desktop, but there's no reason why you can't embed a silverlight engine in your application. It's been done before such as for the Mac NY Times Reader. You'll have better luck working with Moonlight, which targets the Silverlight API, which is a subset of full WPF I am new to Linux but have some experience in Windows apps and I wanted to know if Multi Point could be implemented in Linux? -- *fingers crossed* After all, there's nothing impossible in programming!!! -- View this message in context: http://mono.1490590.n4.nabble.com/Desktop-Silverlight-applicaition-for-Linux-tp2321439p2321439.html Sent from the Mono - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ Mono-list maillist - Mono-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list ___ Mono-list maillist - Mono-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
Re: [Mono-list] Ubuntu
By the way I use Jo's PPA (bandger ports). I can highly recommend it to anyone out there trying to run the latest mono develop. Or who needs bug fixes or performance improvements from new mono releases. On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 1:49 PM, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: > On 08/11/2010 09:24 PM, Daniel Hughes wrote: >> Ubuntu does not believe it is its responsibility to update mono >> between OS releases. >> > > It's their responsibility to update *all* of their packages between OS > releases. If they don't, then they presumably had a reason not to. It's > kinda hard for them not to take responsibility for the packages they > ship ;-) > >> Mono does not believe it is its responsibility to provide ubuntu >> packages for new mono releases. >> >> Users fall into a gap between the two. And must compile from source or >> use unsupported third party PPA's if and when they are available. >> > > Jo (aka Directhex) is the guy that packages Mono for Ubuntu proper, so > his PPA isn't really "third party". > > Hope that helps, > > Jeff > > ___ Mono-list maillist - Mono-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
Re: [Mono-list] Réponse automatique d'absence du bur eau : Desktop Silverlight applicaition for Linux
French dude, do you just send the same parley-vow-franshe reply to every post? Get a lift dude. -- View this message in context: http://mono.1490590.n4.nabble.com/Desktop-Silverlight-applicaition-for-Linux-tp2321439p2322112.html Sent from the Mono - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ Mono-list maillist - Mono-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
Re: [Mono-list] Réponse automatique d'absence du bur eau : Desktop Silverlight applicaition for Linux
No need to be rudely xenophobic. It's clearly a misconfigured out of office response. On Aug 11, 2010 10:28 PM, "Newbie2910" wrote: French dude, do you just send the same parley-vow-franshe reply to every post? Get a lift dude. -- View this message in context: http://mono.1490590.n4.nabble.com/Desktop-Silverlight-applicaition-for-Linux-tp2321439p2322112.html Sent from the Mono - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ Mono-list maillist - Mono-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list ___ Mono-list maillist - Mono-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
Re: [Mono-list] Ubuntu
> Quote > "so my team plays a double role there (OpenSUSE) or distributions > where Mono is not included by default" > > So if ubuntu did not support mono by including it by default. Then you > would package it. Ubuntu would get first class support from the mono > team. We would get new versions of mono as they are released and so > mono support on ubuntu would be improved. > You are quoting without the rest of the context, you are setting up a straw man and then you attempt to bring it down. It is also trivial to debunk your thesis. Fedora does not ship Mono by default, and we do not package it for Fedora either. The Fedora packages are maintained by the community. ___ Mono-list maillist - Mono-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
Re: [Mono-list] Ubuntu
I understand and apologize. On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 2:35 PM, Miguel de Icaza wrote: > >> Quote >> "so my team plays a double role there (OpenSUSE) or distributions >> where Mono is not included by default" >> >> So if ubuntu did not support mono by including it by default. Then you >> would package it. Ubuntu would get first class support from the mono >> team. We would get new versions of mono as they are released and so >> mono support on ubuntu would be improved. > > You are quoting without the rest of the context, you are setting up a straw > man and then you attempt to bring it down. > It is also trivial to debunk your thesis. Fedora does not ship Mono by > default, and we do not package it for Fedora either. The Fedora packages > are maintained by the community. > ___ Mono-list maillist - Mono-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
