B.R. wrote: > It's not really up to Novell here, it's up to the Debian/Ubuntu > maintainers to decide when new versions get supported. Part of the > reason for this is that Debian, and by extension Ubuntu, have very > specific policies on how things should be packaged (the Debian Free > Software Guidelines are very strict, and the Mono project does violate > them in a few places), and Novell simply haven't the resources to > invest in hiring someone specifically to do Debian (and by extension > Ubuntu) packaging, so it's left up to the maintainers who do a pretty > good job with the time and resources they have. The reason binaries > are shipped for Windows with every release is because there's no > package specification to follow, so the binary packages are easy to > build (build the libs, put them in the right places, package them up > in an installer and you're good to go). I think that's a bit lame - it makes a big assumption about the mono team shipping a package for a start. Binary compatibility for apps (if not drivers) is at least passable with current Linux systems. Why should it be hard to ship a universal binary when Adobe and Sun (in particular) have managed it for a long time?
I can see that Novell need SLES to be the best platform for Mono for commercial, but I think it needs to be ubiquitous first and then given value add on the Novell product - and that means better support for other Linuxen, and OpenSolaris, and FreeBSD. James _______________________________________________ Mono-list maillist - [email protected] http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
