On Jan 2, 2008 2:18 PM, David Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, Jan 02, 2008 at 01:36:06PM -0800, Tracy R Reed wrote: > > James G. Sack (jim) wrote: > >> So is mono more like a loader or an execution environment, or am I > >> (probably) confused? > > > > Speaking of Mono... > > > > Chuck: Are you in any way concerned about your marriage to Mono and it's > > relationship with Microsoft and their habit of screwing people over? Any > > chance of you running into liability over software patents or some other > > such thing? How about this Novell/Miguel de Icaza thing and their > > relationship with Mono and Microsoft etc? Sounds like complicated legal > > territory. > > It depends a lot on what parts of the CLR you are dependent on. The core > with libraries has a fairly unrestrictive license as part of it being a > standard. What people are concerned about is the extra libraries that MS > is off writing.
The language only uses the core parts of the CLR. So your concerns would depend on what libs you used in your project. > Honestly, though, Miguel has definitely said things that scared me. There > is also a lot of implementation stuff that betrays a definite Windows bent > to it. Really? I saw Miguel at that conference and he was on Linux the whole time. He seemed quite proud of it and enjoyed showing off his fancy window manager. He was cold on Mac specific enhancements for awhile due to prioritizing desktop Linux instead. But I don't read up on him regularly so I'm not arguing your point. Just adding some observations. > Technically, I think it's a lot better choice of a runtime than Java. Same here. But another goal for Cobra is to be popular because that's a kind of language feature too. So I welcome any Java-backend efforts. I'll probably even solicit for it later in the year. -Chuck -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-lpsg
